Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

12. I know. At first I thought that might be a mistake, not to say he was not very stressed, as he said

Reply to NavyDem (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 23, 2011, 04:25 AM

Dec 2011

over and over in the chat logs.

But then I am not a military lawyer and they may feel that in this kind of court, there would be no tolerance for whistle-blowers. I tend to think that is probably true. And there is enough evidence to show he was having problems which were not dealt with so maybe that is a better defense. It's doubtful he will get off, but with this defense, they may get some of the charges thrown out and any sentence he might get, reduced.

For the lawyers, it could be they are trying to save his life. So, appealing for understanding based on his mental condition, which could also be used to show he was not 'aiding the enemy', the most serious charge, is probably a safer strategy than a whistle-blower defense.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

25 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Help Bradley Manning by offering words of support in the Washington Post comments section. [View all] go west young man Dec 2011 OP

In what way does this action help him? jberryhill Dec 2011 #1

It's called support. Moral as well as visual for the rest of the world to see. go west young man Dec 2011 #5

Not mocking at all jberryhill Dec 2011 #20

Public support always helps, and informing others of the facts rather than allowing only the Gov.'s sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #6

While I support him because I think the government needs to be more honest, Lunabelle Dec 2011 #2

You mean like Ellsberg? Smarmie Doofus Dec 2011 #3

I don't know who that is but I'll google it to see what I come up with Lunabelle Dec 2011 #4

That's probably true. I wish that like Ellsberg he was being tried in a civilian court. I sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #7

I've been following the Article 32 hearing NavyDem Dec 2011 #8

I know. At first I thought that might be a mistake, not to say he was not very stressed, as he said sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #12

I think it's very possible that when it goes to CM Manning will not be facing all 22 charges. NavyDem Dec 2011 #13

Good point, regarding the whistle blower charge. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #16

The article 32 hearing is the pre-trial, so that portion is over. NavyDem Dec 2011 #18

Thanks, so we'll probably know by January. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #19

Hunh? Don't you mean he "allegedly chose to break the law"? - n/t coalition_unwilling Dec 2011 #9

No, I'm not the government so I dont have to say allegedly.n/t Lunabelle Dec 2011 #14

The thing is, it's not really law and order if the rule of law only applies EFerrari Dec 2011 #10

Hello! Have you read Greenwald's new book? Luminous Animal Dec 2011 #11

I haven't read it but his FAIR speech was outstanding. EFerrari Dec 2011 #24

Just because Bush/Cheney and other rich fucks get away with crap because they have power we don't Lunabelle Dec 2011 #15

Bush was a CIC, so not just another rich person in this case. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #17

Maybe so but the double standard and obvious injustice exists. go west young man Dec 2011 #22

No one is arguing that no one should ever be prosecuted for crimes. EFerrari Dec 2011 #23

K&R (nt) T S Justly Dec 2011 #21

Remember Nuremburg? dougolat Dec 2011 #25