Judge sentences Bradley Manning to 35 years

[Common]

FORT MEADE, Md. — A military judge sentenced Army Pfc. Bradley Manning to 35 years in prison on Wednesday after he was found guilty of giving thousands of secret government documents to WikiLeaks in the biggest such disclosure in U.S. history.
Army Col. Denise Lind also ordered that Manning be reduced in rank to private and dishonorably discharged from the Army. She said Manning would be credited with 1,294 days based on the time he has served in military custody since his arrest in 2010.



http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/bradley-manning-sentence-wikileaks-95753.html?hp=t2_3

[Peter1469]

I bet a panel (jury) would have given him a lot more. (Which is why the defense chose judge alone).

[jillian]

FORT MEADE, Md. — A military judge sentenced Army Pfc. Bradley Manning to 35 years in prison on Wednesday after he was found guilty of giving thousands of secret government documents to WikiLeaks in the biggest such disclosure in U.S. history.
Army Col. Denise Lind also ordered that Manning be reduced in rank to private and dishonorably discharged from the Army. She said Manning would be credited with 1,294 days based on the time he has served in military custody since his arrest in 2010.



http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/bradley-manning-sentence-wikileaks-95753.html?hp=t2_3



good.

jonathan pollard is doing a life sentence. manning got off easy.

[GrassrootsConservative]

I cannot imagine spending that much time in prison. I think I would eventually have to off myself.

35 years... that's the entirety of my life so far plus 13 years. Fuck that.

[Singularity]

The military offers generous sentence reductions for good behavior,
and that combined with the fact that Manning committed an ultimately
bloodless crime means that he will be first eligible for parole in
eight years (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bradley-manning-35-years-article-1.1432622). Of course, he might not get it, but it's certainly, from
his point of view, the best situation he could have reasonably hoped
for and a rough compromise between the prosecution and defense.

[Mr Happy]

I hope he only does the eight years....

[Singularity]

I hope he only does the eight years....I wouldn't be surprised. While someone with Manning's profile
will probably get some private support when he gets out of the
brig, eight years in said brig plus a dishonorable discharge will
probably be considered by the government to be enough of a
never, ever do this, ever warning to his peers in the rank-
and file intelligence units to suffice.

And let's face it; yes, Manning by the letter of the law committed
a pretty grave error in judgment, at the very least, and judgment
is something that people who are trusted with American secrets
must have, and must held to account for lacking. But punishing
Manning is not and never was the government's objective. He is
an example, and once his name disappears off of the front page,
he becomes a body taking up a cell in Leavenworth that doesn't
really need to be there after a few years.

[Mr Happy]

I wouldn't be surprised. While someone with Manning's profile
will probably get some private support when he gets out of the
brig, eight years in said brig plus a dishonorable discharge will
probably be considered by the government to be enough of a
never, ever do this, ever warning to his peers in the rank-
and file intelligence units to suffice.

And let's face it; yes, Manning by the letter of the law committed
a pretty grave error in judgment, at the very least, and judgment
is something that people who are trusted with American secrets
must have, and must held to account for lacking. But punishing
Manning is not and never was the government's objective. He is
an example, and once his name disappears off of the front page,
he becomes a body taking up a cell in Leavenworth that doesn't
really need to be there after a few years.

I wonder if the government has learned any lessons from this. And I don't mean about who to trust with its secrets, I mean about what should constitute a 'secret' and what is just the government covering its arse or spying on people. Take away whether you think Manning was moral or not in what he did, some of that Wikileaks stuff should have people in jail and does not meet the standards the general public expects of its government.

[Singularity]

I wonder if the government has learned any lessons from this. And I don't mean about who to trust with its secrets, I mean about what should constitute a 'secret' and what is just the government covering its arse or spying on people. Take away whether you think Manning was moral or not in what he did, some of that Wikileaks stuff should have people in jail and does not meet the standards the general public expects of its government.The principle is "malum prohibitum." Manning must go to jail not
because he did any grave amount of criminal damage (other than
embarassing the hell out of Uncle Sam), but because he swore an
oath to keep and guard the secrets of the United States, because
that was a part of his orders, and those orders were lawful.

In effect, he must suffer because the law is what it is, and he
should have known better than to do what he did for his own sake.
It cannot be argued that he did not know better -- the terms
and consequences of violating the Uniform Code of Military
Justice are explained in detail upon enlistment, and then they
are screamed in your face for a schedule of weeks.

Don't get me wrong, I feel sorry for the kid. Eight years in
Kansas with no ability to leave isn't the best situation -- I know
that from experience. :grin: And, to be serious, the Leavenworth
brig is a bad place to be, though I have always heard that
if you're going to be in prison for the long haul, the military
makes it so that place certainly could be worse.

[Peter1469]

Leavenworth often becomes too crowded and the military farms some of the prisoners off to federal prisons. They put the selected prisoners on suicide watch before the transfer.

[jillian]

I wonder if the government has learned any lessons from this. And I don't mean about who to trust with its secrets, I mean about what should constitute a 'secret' and what is just the government covering its arse or spying on people. Take away whether you think Manning was moral or not in what he did, some of that Wikileaks stuff should have people in jail and does not meet the standards the general public expects of its government.

as decided by whom? julian assange?

if what manning did was so noble, why is pollard in jail for life?

[Common]

He got what he earned, his sorry is waaaaaaay to late to be believable especially right before hes sentenced.
Assange needs a drone hit out on him.

[zelmo1234]

I wonder if the government has learned any lessons from this. And I don't mean about who to trust with its secrets, I mean about what should constitute a 'secret' and what is just the government covering its arse or spying on people. Take away whether you think Manning was moral or not in what he did, some of that Wikileaks stuff should have people in jail and does not meet the standards the general public expects of its government.

Why no they are really pissed at Sowden for leaking the NSA spying thing?

If he ever comes back the liberals will not be so soft on him!

[Mr Happy]

as decided by whom? julian assange?

if what manning did was so noble, why is pollard in jail for life?

If not by him, then who? The government. Stop bringing Pollard back into it. Totally different set of circumstances....

[Mr Happy]

He got what he earned, his sorry is waaaaaaay to late to be believable especially right before hes sentenced.
Assange needs a drone hit out on him.

Why? Because he calls the govt to account? Nice...

[Mister D]

as decided by whom? julian assange?

if what manning did was so noble, why is pollard in jail for life?

Because he's a Jew loyal to his real homeland not the US.

[Cigar]

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/RallT/2013/RallT20130822_low.jpg

[Matty]

little manly now wants to be a little girlie, he wants a sex change operation and of course we'll have to pay for it.

[jillian]

If not by him, then who? The government. Stop bringing Pollard back into it. Totally different set of circumstances....

Not really. Pollard thought he was doing the right thing, too. And while manning may have been sincere, I think snowden isn't.

Regardless, neither was a whistle blower. Neither disclosed illegal behavior, which is a hallmark of whistle blower laws.