RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Galindez writes: "Coombs argued that Bradley Manning had no direct knowledge that documents he gave to Wikileaks would make their way to the enemy. Coombs argued that Manning had the ability to send the documents directly to al Qaeda but did not."

Bradley Manning is escorted from the courthouse to a vehicle on July 15th, 2013 at Fort Meade. (photo: Scott Galindez/RSN)
Bradley Manning is escorted from the courthouse to a vehicle on July 15th, 2013 at Fort Meade. (photo: Scott Galindez/RSN)

The Trial of Bradley Manning: Day 18

By Scott Galindez, Reader Supported News

16 July 13


RSN Special Coverage: Trial of Bradley Manning

rsn fr splash promo


oday was mostly procedural. The Army and the defense argued the scope of the Army's rebuttal testimony that will begin on Thursday. They also argued two of the defense motions for dismissal of charges including "Aiding the Enemy."

Motions to dismiss

Defense Attorney David Coombs in oral argument for the first motion for a not guilty plea - the charges related to the downloading of the State Department cables - argued that the Army presented no evidence that Bradley Manning violated access restrictions when using the program Wget to download the cables. The Army argued that the unauthorized use of the executable program Wget was a violation of Manning'g access authority.

Coombs argued that Manning did violate user restrictions on the computer, but not access restrictions to the cables. Manning could have accessed the cables and downloaded them without use of the program.

There was an exchange about whether programs used to play music and view movies are also unauthorized. The government argued that "music" is not an executable file. Coombs argued that the program that plays the music is an executable program that was installed on computers without authorization.

Questions asked by the judge indicated that she was looking for the government to distinguish between why adding programs to play music was okay and installing Wget was not. The significance of this is that the Army must present some evidence on all the elements necessary for a guilty verdict, during the presentation of their case. If the judge finds that they didn't, she has to enter a finding of not guilty even if evidence was presented during the defense's case.

Aiding the Enemy

The next argument the court heard was the defense motion to find Manning not guilty of the charge of aiding the enemy. Coombs argued that Bradley Manning had no knowledge that documents he gave to Wikileaks would make their way to the enemy. In fact, the charge states that the the documents went to al Qaeda. Coombs argued that Manning had no knowledge that al Qaeda would go to Wikileaks and read the documents. Coombs argued that Manning had the ability to send the documents directly to al Qaeda but did not.

Coombs conceded that giving the information to Wikileaks may have violated many laws, but it did not rise to the level of aiding the enemy. He argued that the only way the Army could prove that giving evidence to the media was an indirect way to aid the enemy was to prove that Manning's motive was to use the media to get information to the enemy that he couldn't otherwise get to them.

The thrust of Coombs's argument was that Manning had to have direct knowledge that the information would be used by the enemy.

The Army countered that Manning was told in training that information posted on Wikileaks was being used by the enemy. They also argued that Manning accessed documents that warned that Wikileaks information was being used by the enemy. They argued that the threshold is only that they presented evidence that Manning should have known the information would go to the enemy.

Coombs countered by saying that evidence was presented during the prosecution's case as to what Manning's intent was. Nowhere in chats with Julian Assange and Adrian Lambo did Manning talk about getting the information to anyone in al Qaeda. In fact, their evidence showed that that Manning's intent was to trigger a national debate on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The other two outstanding motions to dismiss were not heard today. The judge gave both sides more time to present documents pertaining to the charges.

Scope of the Government's Rebuttal

There will be rebuttal witnesses called on Thursday. They will rebut testimony as to Manning's motives. They will also counter defense testimony that executable files are allowed on the unit's computers if run from a disk.

The Army is still seeking an expert witness to counter Professor Benkler's testimony on Wikileaks operating as a media organization. The judge was not pleased that the Army wasn't already prepared to counter Benkler's testimony before the trial began. There was no ruling on whether the "unknown" witness is allowed.

The court will recess until Thursday for rebuttal testimony and rulings on the government's motions to dismiss certain charges.

Scott Galindez attended Syracuse University, where he first became politically active. The writings of El Salvador's slain archbishop Oscar Romero and the on-campus South Africa divestment movement converted him from a Reagan supporter to an activist for Peace and Justice. Over the years he has been influenced by the likes of Philip Berrigan, William Thomas, Mitch Snyder, Don White, Lisa Fithian, and Paul Wellstone. Scott met Marc Ash while organizing counterinaugural events after George W. Bush's first stolen election. Scott will be spending a year covering the presidential election from Iowa.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+6 # Douglas Jack 2013-07-16 11:54
War Crimes such as indiscriminate & even deliberate massacre of women, children, media & other civilians by the US army crosses the line of Manning's Duty-to-Report. Army lawyers can't hide behind Al CIAda's (intentional spelling due to CIA's founding & ongoing facilitation since Afghanistan) supposed learning about War-crimes through Bradley Manning, when they violate the Geneva Convention, Nuremberg protocols, the Law-of-Necessit y (priorities in human law) US Constitution & all other human laws.

Judge Denise Lind & other agents of the court have a legal duty (Nuremberg protocols) to facilitate & not-to-suppress whistleblowers such as PVT Manning, upon pain of imprisonment & even the death penalty as in US established jurisprudence following WW2. When true justice is served, there will be quite a rendering. I reject the death-penalty in any circumstances, however Judge Lind should be reminded of the gravity of their complicity in US War-Crimes & punishments prescribed by law.
+12 # AMLLLLL 2013-07-16 12:14
Thanks, Scott, your comprehensive coverage is a welcome sight.
+6 # blizmo1 2013-07-17 00:08
Thank you, Scott, for this beat-by-beat coverage; it's critical in building a true historical record of this profoundly important case, setting the stage for students and activists to actually learn about all this and effectively do something.

And thank you RSN for putting this all together for us on a daily basis, I can't even FIND coverage of Pvt Manning's case in the mainstream media.

Thank you for even CHALLENGING what today's badly-morphed concept of "news outlet" and "journalism" itself.

Hahaha -- no wonder the Government couldn't find a rebuttal for Prof Benkler's testimony -- "journalism," "news" and "access to truth" (what this trial is really all about) wasn't even on their radar.

RSN -- mmmm-wah!

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.