Prosecutors hid reports that clear Manning? Judge orders release of new documents in WikiLeaks suspect's case

Published time: July 31, 2012 19:53
Edited time: July 31, 2012 23:53
Bradley Manning (C), (Reuters / Jose Luis Magaua)

A US military judge ruled that WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning, 24, will have the right to access documents that prosecutors may have been hiding, which assess the effect of his crime on US national security.

The suspect’s defense lawyer’s claim that prosecutors were hiding reports by government agencies that could help Manning’s case. These reports, including assessments by the State Department, the FBI and the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive (Oncix), measured the impact that the leaked classified documents had on national security.

Manning was arrested in May 2010 for having given classified government material to WikiLeaks. He faces charges for “aiding the enemy,” which is a capital offense.

The defendant’s lawyer, David Coombs, believes the reports will prove that the release of the documents had no major effect on US national security. He has been requesting access to them for months.

Among the classified material that Manning allegedly illegally gave to WikiLeaks were videos of a 2007 helicopter gun attack in Baghdad, the 2009 Granai airstrike in Afghanistan, hundreds of thousands of US diplomatic cables and half a million army reports (known as the “Afghan War logs”).

Judge Denise Lind ruled that prosecutors must provide “damage assessment” reports from government agencies, measuring the impact of the classified material on WikiLeaks. On Monday the judge also ordered the prosecution to give an account of why it had refused to share all of the evidence with the defense.

Prosecutors must now clarify when they became aware of the information they turned over to the defense, when they shared the files, what they were and how they gathered information for the assessment at the more than 60 government agencies they questioned.

“It’s definitely heartening that David Coombs’ arguments are resonating with the judge,”said Zach Pesavento, a spokesman for the Bradley Manning support network.“The prosecution appears to have been deliberately misunderstanding its requirements to the defense.”

If convicted, Manning could face life in prison, and the documents assessing his impact on national security could affect the remainder of the trial.


Comments (12)

Anonymous user 09.04.2013 20:10

isn't keeping confidential what is inexcusable the point of this treatment of a patriot?

0

Undo

Arklight (unregistered) 17.10.2012 11:04

Prosecutors view their function in life as putting people in prison, so whatever it takes is just fine with them. Trouble is, when prosecutors get caught hiding, destroying or fabricating evidence, nothing ever happens to the prosecutor who just goes on prosecuting, more careful that he/she doesn't get caught, next time.

0

Undo

Clair (unregistered) 31.08.2012 16:05

John (unregistered) wrote in #8
> So much for American justice... Manning that did not disclose military secrets but exposed the USA for the corrupt country it is gets imprisoned.  
A ll posters with similar statements, link to the exact documents that show any corruption. Do you mean the state department reports on corruption in other countries?
Other than lying about the cause of death of a camera crew, please show what corruption has been shown.
Then please tell which country you are from and link to the same state department documents about your country.
> So much for American justice.Bradley Manning was/is in the military and thus falls under US military justice.It is not "American" justice.
> Tell me, please, what damages were done to the USA by the leaks?It doesn't matter. If Manning sent the classified documents, he did break the law (if not he is innocent).
It seems not 1 previous poster has any idea of how law works? __________ ___ Maybe, the last rhetoric question you are posing here will win you a scholarship for the law school.Huh? Perhaps, you should give it a try to a lawyers career or one of the paralegals ? So much *genuinely* in your reasoning, really. But before you go into the Penal Code, you may start off with  the First Amendment which usually applies to the whistleblowers preventing their criminal prosecution.At least, it used to be so..

0

Undo

View all comments (12)
Add comment

By posting your comment, you agree to abide by our Posting rules

Log in to comment in full, or comment anonymously under character-limit restriction.

100 Text

– required fields

Register or

Name

Password

Show password

Register

or Register

Request a new password

Send

or Register

To complete a registration check
your Email:

or Register

A password has been sent to your email address

Edit profile

Name

New password

Retype new password

Current password

Save

Cancel

Follow us