On Tuesday, I will return to Fort Meade, Maryland, where court martial proceedings against Pfc. Bradley Manning, the soldier accused of releasing classified information to WikiLeaks, resume. The focus of those proceedings will involve an effort by David Coombs, Manning’s defense lawyer, to have an “aiding the enemy” charge dismissed. This is one of the more egregious charges Manning faces and is based on the contention by the government that Manning knowingly provided “intelligence” to al Qaeda and other related terrorist groups indirectly when he allegedly released information to WikiLeaks.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Saturday April 21, 2012 1:59 pm|
|By: Kevin Gosztola Saturday March 31, 2012 7:52 am|
The defense for Pfc. Bradley Manning, the soldier accused of releasing classified information to WikiLeaks, has tried to put a halt to secrecy in Manning’s court martial proceedings by making court filings available to the public and the press. The government, however, remains opposed to efforts to make the proceedings more transparent. And now, as the defense moves to address concern that the proceedings are happening in secret, the government plans to interfere with the defense’s release of its filings and force the defense to make redactions.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Thursday March 15, 2012 12:40 pm|
The defense filed a motion to dismiss all charges with prejudice against Bradley Manning after concluding the government had violated Manning’s rights by failing to turn over evidence.
After more than an hour of deliberation in court over a motion to compel discovery, defense attorney David Coombs declared that the defense would be filing a motion. The defense decided the way the government was using Brady, which is a rule that mandates the disclosure of evidence, violated Manning’s right to a fair trial. The defense urged the military judge, Col. Denise Lind, to examine the request to compel discovery, the standards cited by the government, and what they relied upon to provide evidence thus far needed when reviewing the motion.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Friday December 16, 2011 8:05 am|
Manning’s defense lawyer, David E. Coombs, has filed a motion requesting Lt. Col. Paul Almanza recuse himself from his position as the presiding investigative officer over Pfc. Bradley Manning’s Article 32 hearing.
Coombs listed four reasons that he says independently support but collectively mandate Almanza recuse himself.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Monday November 21, 2011 1:20 pm|
David Coombs, lawyer for PFC Bradley Manning, the accused whistleblower to WikiLeaks, reports the Army has finally scheduled a date for his pre-trial Article 32 hearing. It will begin on December 16. Except for when classified information is being discussed, the public will be able to attend the hearing.
|By: emptywheel Thursday April 21, 2011 9:41 am|
Two separate notes from two separate people seem to be emphasizing that the POI decision had nothing to do with Manning’s psychological health.
|By: Michael Whitney Wednesday April 20, 2011 8:15 am|
Yesterday the Pentagon surprised everybody – including Bradley Manning’s lawyer – with news that the accused Wikileaks whistleblower will be moved from the Quantico brig in Virginia to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. The Pentagon’s lawyer, Jeh Johnson, announced Manning’s transfer in a snap press conference (video embedded) that revealed the government’s strategy: take Manning to a place “not in the Washington[, DC] area” where he will “likely be in pre-trial confinement for a while.”
|By: Jeff Kaye Thursday March 3, 2011 4:10 pm|
Besides conditions of solitary confinement, harassment day and night, restriction of reading material, making him walk in shackles if he leaves his cell, inability to communicate with any other prisoners, all imposed upon PFC Bradley Manning, who has never been convicted of any crime, we must now add the degradation and humiliation of hours-long forced nakedness
|By: Jane Hamsher Wednesday March 2, 2011 4:40 pm|
The government is alleging Manning “knowingly gave intelligence information” and that WikiLeaks “received” it. Does that make”WikiLeaks” the “enemy” in question?
|By: Jane Hamsher Wednesday March 2, 2011 2:05 pm|
The Department of Defense is holding a press conference to announce new charges against Bradley Manning. Now that the government’s case against Julian Assange is falling apart, the Pentagon is ratcheting up the pressure on Manning.
The government alleged nothing regarding “aiding and abetting the enemy” when they originally charged Manning in July of 2010. Surely they must have new and compelling evidence to substantiate such serious charges. If not, they’re just bringing the full force of the state down on Manning’s head because he would not give them a false confession against Julian Assange they needed to make their case.