Bradley Manning's supervisor pleas the 5th... lol...

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16239198


Pte Manning's defence says his closest supervisor, Sgt 1st Class Paul Adkins, failed to suspend his intelligence security clearance despite at least two fits of rage by the private during which he overturned furniture.

However, Sgt Adkins refused to testify on Sunday, invoking his right against self-incrimination as he began answering questions.
So he either gets a way lighter sentence or the army are assholes...
 
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Added at: 09:00
1. Get mad about job
2. Leak confidential info
3. Get caught
4. Blame supervisors for "failing to recognize that I was angry and therefore might retaliate"
5. Sit back and pretend that it's not your fault you released confidential info - if someone else was doing their job you wouldn't have had the chance

Talk about not taking responsibility for your own actions. Even if they should have prevented you from doing it, that in no way makes you any less culpable for your actions.

Still, if his bosses aren't going to testify against him, the case is naturally weakened, and the defense can use that to their advantage.
 
The man posted as bradass87 and admitted to leaking the cables... if that's not impaired mental facilities i dont know what is...
 
C

crono1224

His best bet may have to stuck to being a 'hero' for the wiki leaks thing. I don't personally believe it but a lot of people have put him up on a pedestal.
 
The Rosenbergs
YEs I was thinking of them as well.

Who else?

Far more traitors were imprisoned than were given death sentences, and I Manning's offences are hardly comparable to what the Rosenbergs did.

Consider the following:

http://listverse.com/2010/07/04/top-10-traitors-in-us-history/

They were all much, much worse than Manning.

Do you really think that in the 50's - or at any time - Manning's alleged crimes would have given him the death sentence?
 
Bradley Manning has been found guilty of 20 charges in total, but was found not guilty of "aiding the enemy", the most severe charge brought against him.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23506213

He could be sentenced for over 100 years if he gets the maximum for each charge and has to serve them consecutively. Sentencing hearing starts tomorrow.
Well them not finding guilty on "aiding the enemy" is a good thing since the case for that was. "Al Queda has computers therefore he supplied Al Queda with that information. No I don't have to prove that anybody actually got hurt"

Hopefully the judge will give him a break and have all the time served concurrently with time taken off cause of the abuse he has gone through.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top