You need to do some research
Quote:
Originally Posted by
motorfirebox
Punishment before trial is not justice; in fact, it's injustice, contrary to the entire point of having trials in the first place.
It's not punishment -- though it may be punishing. It's pre-trial confinement, similar to being held without bail before a civilian criminal trial (LINK). I have no idea how many civilians are being so held due to being a perceived flight risk but I'm sure you object to their confinement as well.
Most military offenders are not placed in pre-trial confinement but those with major offenses (of which Manning is accused) and who are deemed flight risks (Manning's UK connection. Extradition is expensive...) will almost always be confined until all the investigations are complete. The Judge Advocates discourage pre-trial unless it really seems necessary in order to avoid creating sympathy for the accused by the Court Martial boar or Military Jury -- that because of the protections afforded the accused, the investigations typically take far longer than would a comparable civilian effort.
In my experience and observation, the system goes to great lengths to insure they have a solid case before charges are preferred. The military justice system gets wrongly slammed for having a high conviction rate. It does but that's due to the fact that the Judge Advocates won't charge people unless they have a really solid case. Most people look at the Charged:Tried ratio (civilian Indictment:Trial). A better assessment would be crimes committed versus offenses charged -- that ratio is low, far lower than most civilian venues.
Quote:
It is very much in the US's interests to publicly torture Manning...you" being anyone, soldier, civilian, or foreign national, who wants to try to leak sensitive material.
That has not deterred previous leakers, most of whom don't get caught -- Manning apparently did get caught. You run across a lot of folks in the service who are about a tenth as smart as they think they are and who do dumb stuff. Happens all the time...
Quote:
The idea that Manning is being held under prevention of injury protocols solely for his own safety (even recognizing that ensuring his safety is necessary to bring him to trial) is naivete at best and willful ignorance at worst.
That sentence you wrote is the reason for my suggestion. That's just not correct. If there's any justice system that is more slavishly overprotective of the rights of the accused than the US Military Justice system, I'm unaware of it (LINK).
Quote:
We have a pretty poor track record when it comes to the rights of people we decide are enemies. If it looks like we're acting heinously when we deal with an enemy, it's probably because we're acting heinously.
We do heinous occasionally, mostly we don't. Though we do stupid a lot...:D
Quote:
If you want to see Manning tried and shot, well, okay--let's do that. Personally, I'm not sure the death penalty is warranted in this case, but that's a different argument; at the very least, shooting him after trying him for treason ...
I doubt a Treason charge would stick and to my knowledge, no one other than a few folks here and there are interested in that. I strongly doubt the death penalty will be sought though I do not doubt some folks will wish for that.
Quote:
But to hold Manning under his current conditions and claim it's justice is to be either appallingly unaware of political reality or appalling unwilling to accept those realities.
May I suggest it is you that appears unwilling to accept realities. Manning hasn't been subjected to much more hassle than most armed forces Recruits are subjected to for weeks at a time and not nearly as much as many 'endure' in more advanced training. There is no official claim of 'justice' in his current detention -- he's in pre-trial confinement, no more.
Also note, he's currently at the USDB at Leavenworth and the Army has a much more benign concept of incarceration than do the Marines so your fears may well be misplaced. :wry:
Manning Offers Limited Guilty Plea
From David Coombs:
Quote:
07 November 2012
PFC Manning's Offered Plea and Forum Selection
PFC Manning has offered to plead guilty to various offenses through a process known as "pleading by exceptions and substitutions." To clarify, PFC Manning is not pleading guilty to the specifications as charged by the Government. Rather, PFC Manning is attempting to accept responsibility for offenses that are encapsulated within, or are a subset of, the charged offenses. The Court will consider whether this is a permissible plea.
PFC Manning is not submitting a plea as part of an agreement or deal with the Government. Further, the Government does not need to agree to PFC Manning's plea; the Court simply has to determine that the plea is legally permissible. If the Court allows PFC Manning to plead guilty by exceptions and substitutions, the Government may still elect to prove up the charged offenses. Pleading by exceptions and substitutions, in other words, does not change the offenses with which PFC Manning has been charged and for which he is scheduled to stand trial.
PFC Manning has also provided notice of his forum selection. He has elected to be tried by Military Judge alone.
Interesting tactic, sometimes used in civilian courts. The idea is to strike a "plea bargain" (via the judge's decision alone to a lesser charge) where a formal plea bargain is foreclosed (for one reason or another). It has worked.
Regards
Mike