Bradley Manning, suspected source for WikiLeaks, will go on trial Dec. 16 in Maryland

The first hearing for Bradley Manning, whom the US believes was the source for Wikileaks State Department cables and damning material from the Iraq war, is scheduled to begin at Fort Meade on Dec. 16. The trial is expected to last five days. As Manning's support network points out, "This will be PFC Manning's first appearance before a court and the first time he will face his accusers after 17 months in confinement."


  1. And this isn’t even a trial, it’s an Article 32 hearing, which determines whether there’s enough evidence to warrant a general court-martial. Never mind that he’s already been in jail far long enough for the speedy trial provisions of UCMJ to have long since been exhausted. This is a serious miscarriage of justice.

    1. They’ll make a big deal out of it anyway. Look for the media to try to sandbag OWS with lots of converage of its “significance,” and possibly positioned as a central demand of OWS.

  2. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

      1. No, it’s not the UCMJ. It’s another document that also states:

        This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

        1. No, it’s not the UCMJ. It’s another document that also states:

          Fascinating! What do you call this other document?

        1. Which is why I was asking whether Manning blew his chance at some point for an Article 10 hearing.  I can easily imagine a Kafkaesque process where (1) he must raise Article 10 issues promptly, (2) any issues raised must be ripe for adjudication. In practice there could be no overlap between “prompt” and “ripe”, cutting off any chance to challenge the detention in practice.

  3. And let’s be clear – within that calm, blanket term “confinement”, is the fact that by most accounts, the government has been subjecting him to borderline torture for those 17 months. 

    No trial, not guilty and not convicted. Would someone ask Obama what happened to the whole “fair & open” doctrine he ran on? 

  4. So SOPA and PROTECT IP the two new bills that criminalize online copyright infringement and protect big pharma IP also have text in the bill that would revise sentencing for those guilty including those who reveal national security secrets… Think it is just by chance that the federal legislation that would give decade(s) sentencing of those who reveal military secrets right now when Manning finaly see’s a court room?

    See the bills text (HR 3261 secrion 205)
    (F) apply an appropriate offense level enhancement and minimum offense level for offenses under section 2320(a) of title 18, United States Code, that involve a product intended for use in a military or national security application, or a law enforcement or critical infrastructure application;

    Looks like all of Mr. Manning’s “internet buddies” are being thrown under the bus along with Bradley in this new piece of legislation!

Comments are closed.