Reminder — PFC Manning hasn’t been convicted yet.
You’re entitled to your opinions about what Bradley Manning is accused of having done. Certainly I don’t have a lot of pity for him if he is proven guilty. But via Instapundit comes a link to some other bloggers — primarily lefties, but whatever — who are troubled by how the military is handling his case. I’ve read through them, and did my own research and you know what? They make some pretty good points:
1) Bradley Manning was arrested in May 26th of 2010. He was charged on July 5th with several UCMJ violations and then with 22 additional counts on March 2nd of this year. Since July 29th, 2010, he has been at the brig in Quantico, classified as a “Maximum Custody Detainee.”
2) It is difficult for me to believe that in ten months, the military has not had enough time to put together its case against Mr. Manning. This does not qualify, to my mind, as a speedy trial. In New York, for example, the state may wait no longer than 6 months for all other than murder cases, else the charges are dismissed.
3) The conditions of Manning’s detention at Quantico include a) being held in a 72 sq. foot cell (or the equivalent of a space 8 feet wide by 9 wide). The cell has no window. Somewhere in this 72 square feet is a toilet and a sink. He is not allowed any contact with other detainees. He is allowed access to one book and one magazine, as well as limited access to television. I know that the effect of such a detainment on me would be debilitating, and according to one of PFC Manning’s regular visitors, so it has been on PFC Manning:
“David House, the computer scientist permitted to visit him twice a month, said in December 2010 that Manning’s mental and physical health were deteriorating; he said he had watched Manning change from an intelligent young man to someone who appeared catatonic, and who had difficulty conducting a conversation…”
4) Though the legal concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is not part of the Constitution, it is an accepted principle alluded to in several articles and amendments to that same Constitution, and is a well established principle all the way back to English Common Law. While I accept that a serviceman gives up some of his freedoms and agrees to live by a harsher set of laws than the rest of Americans, whose freedom he has signed up to defend, I don’t think it’s fair to assume the opposite. And so I am saddened that so many milbloggers I know and respect — I’m looking at you, Jimbo, because you’re better than this — are assuming that PFC Manning is guilty until proven innocent.
5) A “Prevention of Injury” order is in effect for PFC Manning. This means he must be checked on every five minutes. He is not allowed to sleep during the day — or at any time after 5 am. He is additionally required to sleep naked, and to stand at attention in the morning, naked. However:
…the Brig psychiatrist assessed PFC Manning as “low risk and requiring only routine outpatient followup [with] no need for … closer clinical observation.” In particular, he indicated that PFC Manning’s statement about the waist band of his underwear was in no way prompted by “a psychiatric condition.”
It strikes me that PFC Manning is either a suicide risk, or he isn’t, and that since the Army’s own psychiatrist has said he is not a suicide risk, the Army’s jailer ought to respect that professional decision. That she has not respected the psychiatrist’s opinion is deeply troubling. I’m suspicious that she is either abusing her power, or the Army is paying for a psychiatrist it has no use for. Not good. And so I am inclined to agree with PFC Manning’s lawyer — an Army Lieutenant Colonel, with Iraq experience — that this treatment is punitive and not justified.
6) Let’s keep in mind that at least some of the prosecution’s case against PFC Manning will rely on the testimony of Adrian Lamo — a convicted felon who stands to gain personally by helping the state prosecute PFC Manning.
So I’m putting the Army on notice. The Army needs to get off its fat fucking ass and try PFC Manning. If New York prosecutors can put people on trial within 6 months, high speed Army cheese-officers can sure as shit do it in ten. If the military’s own psychiatrist says PFC Manning is not a suicide risk, then the military’s jailers need to show some respect for that opinion. Bottom line is, the Army needs to stop trying to act like Barack Obama and have it both ways. Either PFC Manning is a suicide risk, which indicates he is insane, which would bolster an insanity defense, or PFC Manning is not insane. And if PFC Manning is not insane, he needs to be treated the same way as every other soldier accused, but not yet convicted, of a crime.
Listen, if PFC Manning is proven guilty, I’m open to the death penalty as punishment. But by taking so long to try him, the military is making me suspicious that it doesn’t have a real case, and is trying to coerce some kind of a confession out of him, or against Julian Assange.
If so, that shit ain’t right.
And for those of you who just know deep in your heart without yet having all the facts that PFC Manning is guilty, I’d like to point out that the best way to assure that the military doesn’t abuse its power against innocent soldiers like you or the Haditha Marines is to make sure it doesn’t abuse its power against guilty ones. I’ve seen the military throw soldiers under a bus, and so have you.
— Uber Pig
Category: Politics
Just one persnickety point:
“Either PFC Manning is a suicide risk, which indicates he is insane, which would bolster an insanity defense, or PFC Manning is not insane. “
Being suicidal is no indication of insanity without other factors or indications.
I agree with all your problems regards innocent until proven guilty.
I can see some type of special confinement ‘for his own safety’? otherwise, treat him like an innocent man until he is proven guilty. There will be plenty of time for Bradley Manning to suffer the consequences of his actions if the charges are true.
Uber Pig:
First, they have to round up the accomplices. Not all of them are American, and conducting rendition would cause this administration no small amount of the shakes.
Second, how much of the time is being taken up in pre-trial legal maneuvering? We’ve already heard that capital punishment is off the table. We also know military lawyers hate to take cases to trial where superior showmanship trumps the rules of evidence/procedure/what have you. A solid, affirmable, written in blood plea deal is the goal here, along with verifiable information on the network alleged to have supported the crimes.
We’ll be lucky if we see a trial before the POTUS has a chance to pardon him.
The right to a speedy trial is predicated on the ability of the prosecution to assemble it’s facts and proceed to trial.
However, we have no idea what sorts of motions have been filed by defense, and every time a motion is filed, the clock and calendar is pushed back.
Since none of us are privy to that data, I must assume that the trial would have been underway had not other motions been presented which has interfered with that timeline.
If Manning wants his trial to get underway, then all he has to do is notify counsel of such and order them to stop any and all motions on his behalf.
V/T
The right to a speedy trial is predicated on the ability of the prosecution to assemble it’s facts and proceed to trial.
Uh, no. The right to a speedy trial is guaranteed by the Constitution. The prosecution needs to have its ducks in a row before they file charges.
As to whether PFC Manning has waived his right to a speedy trial, I don’t know. I’ve not seen it mentioned anywhere, but it is quite likely, as the time period does seem rather great.
Having said that, it is possible that the prosecution is dragging its feet responding to motions by the defense.
LL,
Being suicidal is not, of itself, proof of insanity. However it is evidence of same.
DaveO,
Sorry man. If they still need to round up accomplices after 10 months: FAIL.
AW1,
It’s true that the defense may be slowing down the trial, in which case it is effectively waiving Manning’s right to a speedy trial. But I haven’t heard anything to that effect. But even if that’s true, you have to wonder if the pre-trial punishment Manning is enduring will hamper his ability, and desire, to continue to make defensive maneuvers.
— Uber Pig
Coupla nits for Uber Pig:
Unless you have proof that the particular cell Manning is in was a broom closet or some such before he got it the configuration of said cell is irrelevant.
As you have said you don’t KNOW who is dragging their feet, or if, in fact, ANYONE is doing so.
If there is what you call A “Prevention of Injury” order in place would YOU take responsibility for having it lifted? Do you have any proof it was put in place to torment Manning?
Just what is the relevance of what you say New York is required to do? Doesn’t the UCMJ have precedence?
Regardless, it seems to me a careful reading of your post demonstrates only that Manning’s legal team appears incompetent to you. Perhaps they are? If so, shouldn’t THAT be the focus here?
Aside: At the very least the NYT, the WAPO, CNN, et al, are not doing their jobs. What a potential cause célèbre!
Uber Pig, I’m human. It’s perhaps not Christian, but it is human. I make no apologies for the absolute loathing I hold for Manning. You are right in that he is not proven guilty. You are right that his confinement may seem extreme, and perhaps you may have a point about the speedyness of his trial. Having said that I think there is pressure form higher. Political pressure, to be specific, to make sure that A). he either walks, or B). the case against him is SO strong, that the defense will have to pull something like MPD out of their hat (highly unlikely). I have no doubt that this administration is staying true to form and simply wishing issues to go away. Not being able to talk to reporters or have a trial covered in extreme detail with NY Times and W Post giving near hysterical accounts of the “poor” fairy being “gay bashed” by the “uncaring” evil nasty military, or conversely the “hero” that was “trying to blow the whistle on the many ‘abuses’ in Iraq” (I use quotes because I could never say such things with a strait faces, and have no idea how a “journalist” could either.) But having said that, I DON’T CARE. I had to relive the worst month of my life, and live in abject terror for a month because of Asshat and Manning. The fact that he allegidly went LOOKING for something, even rejecting a few incidents, tells me that this ass wipe wanted to get back at someone for his precious boy friend leaving him. Big F**king deal. My GF got pregnant by another man, and I blamed myself for the deaths of two of my soldiers. I was on the ground that day and there are actually PICTURES of me treating one of the dick heads in the first group. I did not, and will not release those photos (even though they’re already out there). I could embarrass the hell out of the Army for some of the stupid S**t my brigade commander pulled, or the fact that he lied… Read more »
I’ll wait until after the competency hearing to see what they have to say about “insanity.” It makes one pause when someone sees top secret stuff, recognizes the political damage it can do, downloads a shit ton of it, finds an “appropriate” outlet, passes it along, and it’s all because he’s “crazy.”
UP: How long have we been waiting on Hasan’s trial to start? You would think the government would have ample evidence to get a death penalty convinction right now. Why is he still breathing? As you have noted, the UCMJ doesn’t play by all the same rules as civilian law affords civilians. If his legal team was concerned about either his treatment, or that he hasn’t been afforded a speedy trial, then they should push that. They should, also, head to the media and start blabbing away, because it’s not like the lamestream media doesn’t like to whine about long prison stays before trial. I, also, don’t think that the death penalty should have been taken off the table. What he did was very serious and probably cost some people, that were informants or cooperating with us, their lives. Not to mention putting our own forces in danger by exposing those informants to the point they won’t cooperate with us anymore and we don’t have as much intel that could lead to some of our people getting wounded or killed.
His own arrogance and self professed intellectual superiority got his little ass into this mess, so now he can deal with the reality of it all.
Brad,
You are, of course, correct. I should have worded that better. What I was going for was that, IMHO, Manning’s trial start should be as fast as the prosecution cab get it’s case ready for presentation. After that, the defense can ask for continuations (as could the prosecution) and everything could drag out for quite awhile.
As with the Hassan case, one has to wonder what the hold up in all of this is.
This from Old Trooper pretty well sums it up for me;
“His own arrogance and self professed intellectual superiority got his little ass into this mess, so now he can deal with the reality of it all.”
As has been pointed out thus far, in the absence of facts it is impossible to determine whether or not he is being treated ‘fairly’, I therefore will withhold any judgment against my country’s prosecution of this case until all the evidence is on the table. ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ defined the way you are attempting to is a pretty catch phrase, but that’s all it is, otherwise the very practice of incarceration prior to conviction should be discontinued entirely. What it actually means is;
“According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the presumption of the innocence of a criminal defendant is best described as an assumption of innocence that is indulged in the absence of contrary evidence (Taylor v. Kentucky, 436 U.S. 478, 98 S. Ct. 1930, 56 L. Ed. 2d 468 [1978]). It is not considered evidence of the defendant’s innocence, and it does not require that a mandatory inference favorable to the defendant be drawn from any facts in evidence.”
One last thing U.P., Will you please show me in the DSM-IV where it indicates being suicidal is evidence of insanity? I’ll help you out here, it doesn’t.
UP, In the military, the only way to be found mentally incompetent/insane is at an RCM 706 Board. So, LL is quite correct that simply being suicidal, without more, does not make one insane in the eyes of the law. Without seeing that 706 Board Report, we just don’t know what “the wizard” determined. Given the stage of the process that we’re in, my guess is that a 706 Board has not yet been conducted (the defense usually must request one) or if it has been conducted, it found him perfectly capable of understanding the nature of the charges against him and of participating in his defense, thereby legally sane. In terms of the nature of his restraint, from what I have read, he is under no more or less restraint than any other pretrial detainee who has been classified in the same manner. He may be classified that way not only b/c of his “suicidal ideations,” but also for his own protection. The Brig at Quantico houses most of its pretrial detainees and prisoners in an open squadbay style living arrangement and the Brig staff is likely worried about other pretrial detainees or sentenced prisoners beating the crap out of him. If someone does harm him or if he is able to harm himself b/c of something the Brig failed to do, then they’re the ones on the hook for it. Also, if his actual defense team feels that the conditions of his restraint rise to the level of illegal pretrial punishment, a legal term of art notwithstanding the fact that the term is thrown around alot in the media, then they will file motions to that effect and if the military judge agrees, he’ll get additional credit off of his ultimate sentence, should he be convicted. Again, unless there is something more to it than what I’ve read, the defense is not likely to be successful in such a motion. Also, he gets a “day for day” credit off any adjudged sentence for every day he spends in pretrial confinement and continues to be paid his full salary… Read more »
Don’t have the time right now to address every point, but the Manning Trial is being discussed rather heavily in its minutia over at http://www.caaflog.com/
Uber Pig, shooting from the hip you have some great points, unfortunately it’s shooting from the hip and you are now in the land of lawyers.
Has the ACLU exhibited any significant interest in this matter? Usually when they start making noise the Army caves on anything and everything and lets them go. Sometimes before, such as with the postal clerk and the doctor who would not go to Gulf War 1.
A few further observations on this case.
1. He is Army not civilian. He has no civil rights not provided under the UCMJ. He aint being tried in a civilian court so those rules and procedures don’t apply. The rules and regulations of the UCMJ do.
2. It has been reliably reported by multiple sources that he is a wiseass and somewhat troublesome prisoner. Such as the comment about wasting himself with the waistband of his skivvies. Given the high profile of his case and himself, they are not going to take any chances with him.
3. If the light col. they assigned as his defense lawyer thinks they are abusing him, tell him to file a formal complaint against the facility or shut the fuck up. He is not being abused, and if he doesn’t like being there, he should not commit multiple counts of treason to impress his faggot boy (girl) friend. I am not sure who is who in queer relationships. I am familiar with the Marine brig and it is high profile with many visitors and notable inmates. They police themselves very carefully so as not to get their asses in trouble. But if this shitbird gives them an excuse to rattle his cage a bit, they will take it. If he doesn’t provoke them, they will leave him alone. What they are doing is not illegal, immoral or fattening.
On the issue of presumption of innocence, the state bears the burden of proving Manning guilty, however private citizens such as Uncle Jimbo or random internet commentators such as myself are under no such obligation to extend to him the same rights. I don’t have to pretend OJ is innocent just because he got off, nor do I have to pretend that I think Manning migh be not guilty.
Old Trooper already brought up MAJ Hassan. He also has yet to convicted, but no fair minded observer is going to insist that he be called the “alleged” Fort Hood shooter, or that we should pretend that he’s anything other than guilty. Why should we have to do the same for Manning?
Well, I think it’s Innocent until proven Guilty in the EYES OF THE LAW. That being said, Jimbo, my, your, everyone else’s OPINION doesn’t amount to a hill of beans, so feel bad if you want, but from what has been released in the media, this kid got his wittle feewings huut and made a conscious decision to take the actions he did and is now suffering the consequences of said actions. My daughter is 6 years old and learned shortly after she could understand that actions have consequences. Hell, it was even on the bulletin board at her school on her first day of Kindergarten where she said “daddy tells me that all the time.”
We’re not involved in the case, so we really don’t know WHY the trial hasn’t been had yet. If they wanted to have it, it seems to me that the prosecution could make a stink about it and move it along. You are welcome to your pitty party for Manning, but don’t shame others because of their thoughts on the matter when NONE of us have the true facts on the case.
Here’s a totally errant thought, because I have no connection to either of these at all…but here goes.
The main focus with Hasan is terrorism, and the main focus with Manning is classified information. Both have roots and tentacles that go in all directions, and involve law enforcement, intelligence, and the military. Any time those three intersect, the legal implications and the use and release of those connections are going to slow down the legal machinery in any form of trial, civilian or (I would presume) military.
Please feel free to climb all over my idea, because with something like this, that is how I learn things.
Don’t do the Crime, if you can’t do the Time. I have no sympathy for Manning. He admitted what he did and what he did was treasonous. It was a Faggots hissy fit for being told to shut up and do his job.
He reminds me of an asshole we had in 2005 who wound up Article 15’d 4-5 times and courtmartialed in Taji. Computer nerd, hacker who hacked into SIPRNET for his own use. Didnt believe he had to listen to anyone higher ranking unless they were in his mind smarter than him.
Mannings of the same cloth, let him rot.
Everything has pretty much been covered above.
As far as his “…physical health…deteriorating…”, well Jeez…maybe he needs to do some PT in that cell…he’s certainly got the time.
He’s also got plenty of room for doing lots and lots push ups, burpees, crunches, flutter kicks, planks and air squats in there.
But I am with UP on one thing…God help the US Army if they screw this up and this shit bird walks.
Guys, Thanks for all your commentary so far. I’ve learned quite a bit, but still stand behind my larger points. I’ve attempted to address most comments individually below Ponsdorf — My point about the cell is that confinement sucks, not that he’s being held in a better or worse cell than another accused soldier. RE: Prevention of Injury order, yeah, I’d be prepared to lift it if the prison psychiatrist indicated to me that the detainee was not, in fact, a risk to himself. And as I showed above, that is the case. As to the relevance of the New York statute, it’s not legally relevant — State laws don’t trump federal or military ones — I brought it up to show that a reasonable interpretation of a “speedy trial” at least in New York, is one that takes place inside six months. Therefore, I am not alone in believing the Army needs to get off its fat fucking ass and try Manning. And I’m not sure how you interpreted my post to mean LTC Coombes is incompetent. Doc Bailey — Seeing the “Collateral Murder” video, and knowing how the soldiers it so unfairly portrayed, broke my heart and made me angry. And I was ashamed that military could be so fucking incompetent in how it reacted to it. But my post isn’t really about Assange or Manning. It’s about forcing the military to play by its own rules. Old Trooper — I have no idea what’s delaying the trial. It could be the defense team. But the military doesn’t appear to be playing fair with it’s “prevention of injury” order. And I don’t care if Manning is a smartass or not — if that shit was a crime I’d be in jail right now. Jacobite — Being suicidal is evidence, but not proof of, insanity. At least it is to me. I’ll take my own counsel on that, not DSM-IV, whatever the heck that is, and I suggest you do the same. Seriously, is it your position that suicide is not a possible indicator of insanity? And while there… Read more »
“Being suicidal is evidence, but not proof of, insanity. At least it is to me. I’ll take my own counsel on that, not DSM-IV, whatever the heck that is, and I suggest you do the same.”
Taking one’s own counsel is all well and good, so long as one’s own counsel is based on an informed process. The DSM-IV is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders version IV, until something better comes along it’s THE definitive source on the classification of mental disorders in the US. Respectfully, I’ll choose it’s definitions over your opinions.
UB #22: And I’m not sure how you interpreted my post to mean LTC Coombes is incompetent.
Thanks for taking time to read what I wrote.
However, either you know all the legal machinations or you don’t? The person who does is responsible, I think? If we accept each and every one of your interpretations of the situation THAT simple fact should temper your position about competence?
Perhaps your position is that the LTC is fighting a sort of uphill battle against a conspiracy of some sort?
Those seem to me to be the alternatives.
Jacobite,
You’re correct that DSM-IV does not mention suicidal ideation as evidence of insanity. But since I assume you’ve read it, while I have not, can you tell me where it provides a definition of insanity? I’ll help you out here. It doesn’t.
DSM-IV is unhelpful here. Because insanity is a legal term, and not so much a medical one. So yes, suicidal ideation is something that a judge, or a jury, or a reasonable person like me, might decide constitutes evidence — though not necessarily proof of — being legally insane or, perhaps, of “diminished capacity.” And there are a lot of factors and tests that must be applied for an insanity defense to be successful, and it seems like those factors and tests shift from time to time and from state to state and from crime to crime. But if the Army’s own doctors have said PFC Manning is not a suicide risk, while the Army’s jailers insist on treating him as suicidal, this would seem to open up a potential line of defense for LTC Coombes to make use of. And I just don’t see the upside of that.
So yes, I’ll take my own counsel on whether or not suicidal ideation can be part of an insanity defense, and encourage you to do the same.
Much Love,
Uber Pig
Zero Ponsdorf #22,
I hear you man. No, I don’t know all the facts. But there’s something stinky here. Bottom line, the military has not properly justified why it is forcing him to sleep naked, and then stand at attention naked each morning. Until it does, I can’t help wondering if there’s a dead rat in there.
— Uber Pig
UP,
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with regard to Manning being on suicide watch – you don’t know all the facts. And I say that with all due respect b/c neither do I or anyone else who is posting a comment. As far as I can tell, all we’re getting is carefully screened and edited information from his defense team and supporters. Brig staff do not do this stuff intentionally and if they did and the prosecution found out about it, the prosecutors would put a stop to it so fast it would make your head spin. They, the prosecutors, never want to intentionally inject illegal pretrial confinement (PTC) issues into a case, let alone any issue for appeal. Given how much media and political interest there is in this case, I guarantee you that they are dotting every “i” and crossing every “t” on this one, or at least they are trying to. Given that fact, there has got to be a rational basis for why he’s being to treated the way he is being treated. I’ve worked both sides of the aisle and really can’t see it any other way. But the bottom line is that we don’t know the facts, so it’s wrong to pre-judge the way this is being handled.
Brian,
I’ve seen soldiers get thrown under the bus before, and I’m sure you have, too. Yes, we don’t know all the facts. But guess what? That didn’t stop the government from going after the Haditha marines, or Ilario Pantano. The best way to keep the government honest in cases like these is to make sure we keep it honest in cases like PFC Manning’s. And even Major Hasan’s.
Also it’s probably worth taking a look at LTC Coombes blog.
— UP
Uber Pig,
As an Vietnam veteran who admires Bradley Manning for his courage, I gotta say I find your comments refreshing and encouraging that everyone on the right is not a knee-jerk hate-monger as far as this case goes. It is my contention that what is going on at Quantico is what is called in the business “no-touch, slow torture.” (Read my essay on this and Manning on This Can’t Be Happening at
I agree that the military’s problem is they don’t have a strong case. Plus, a good lawyer can make the kid look sympathetic, since what he did was provide valuable, useful information to the democratic American public (information now released regularly in New York Times stories) on what the government they pay for is doing in the world. Thus, it is my contention they are using their slow torture, humiliating techniques to destroy and mind-scramble this kid, one, as vindictive punishment, and two, in the hopes he will give up evidence on Assange. Finally, they want to make it clear to other soldiers the humiliation they would face — ie. the power of a bad example.
The fact is undeniable that what Manning allegedly released to WikiLeaks is less dangerous to our security than it is embarrassing to the government and military due to its revelations about the unsatisfying realities of our war efforts in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
John Grant
Here’s the web link for the article I referenced, The National Shame of the US Military ‘Show Torture’ Of Bradley Manning.It got screwed up in th4e last message:
John Grant
The fact is undeniable that what Manning allegedly released to WikiLeaks is less dangerous to our security than it is embarrassing to the government and military due to its revelations about the unsatisfying realities of our war efforts in both Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Really, I doubt that is what the people that it endangered in Afghanistan would say.
>As an Vietnam veteran who admires Bradley Manning for his courage
Yeah it takes a lot of courage to anonymously “leak” things. Courage means standing up and vocalizing-being held accountable for what you do. If that is the case, why doesn’t Manning pleade guilty to leaking the documents? That would take courage.. Nope he is upset he got caught. Excuse me if this knee jerk hatemonger shakes her head in disgust….
John Grant,
Let’s be clear, to paraphrase Barack Obama: I have an interest in keeping the military honest. So do all the readers of this blog. And to the extent that the military may not be being honest about the reasons for PFC Manning’s naked time, my interest is aligned with yours.
But that’s a pretty narrow shared interest.
As a libertarian, I’m generally in favor of sunlight and open information. But if Bradley Manning did what he’s alleged to have done, there’s nothing heroic about it. There’s a fundamental difference between leaking small amounts of benign information, and dumping the huge number of cables and documents and videos — some of which hurt our relations with allies, and others of which compromised intelligence sources and put friends of America in mortal danger for no other crime than working with us.
Furthermore, even if you still believe leaking all of these documents to be a good thing, I’m not sure how you can justify leaking them to Wikileaks in particular. Julian Assange proved, with his “Collateral Murder” video, that he’s not interested in helping leak information in the public interest, but specifically in selectively editing information to make American soldiers look evil.
Anyway, I read through the piece you linked, and found it full of half-baked assertions. You claim to be a Vietnam veteran, but you write like a UC Berkeley Freshman attempting to curry favor with his Women’s Studies professor. These guys aren’t heroes. They’re douchebags. Don’t floss with their tampon strings.
— Uber Pig
Well let’s see here, the primary variation of the legal term “insanity” is known as cognitive insanity. It’s described as: “so impaired by a mental disease or defect at the time of the act that he or she did not know the nature or quality of the act, or, if the defendant did know the nature or quality of the act, he or she did not know that the act was wrong.” And how is that mental disease or defect determined or defined by mental health professionals? You guessed in one I hope, using the DSM-IV. Less frequently used, and less frequently allowed (not allowed in Federal court at all), is the legal term “volitional insanity”. This is the “irresistible impulse” defense sometimes used in vengeance cases, it says “the defendant, although able to distinguish right from wrong at the time of the act, suffered from a mental disease or defect that made him or her incapable of controlling her or his actions.” Again, what do you think the primary tool in determining that defendant’s mental disease or defect is? Yep, the DSM-IV. So while yes, suicidal ideation is something that a jury, or a reasonable person like yourself, might decide constitutes evidence (I doubt very seriously a judge would) — though not necessarily proof of — being legally insane, it is not something someone educated about mental illness would consider as evidence, because it’s not. In fact, suicidal behavior can exist and not be an indication of any mental illness at all, it’s possible existence does not help establish “insane” behavior as defined by the Model Penal Code Commission of 1964, nor does it help establish anything under the restrictions enacted under the Insanity Defense Reform Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 17 [1988]). And btw, under the Federal law above, the burden of proof for ‘insanity’ is on the defendant, not on the prosecution. Manning’s lawyer would have to prove to the court beyond reasonable doubt that his client is ‘insane’, the prosecution doesn’t have to prove that he’s not. While they may explore that route I doubt very seriously… Read more »
Jacobite,
I hear you, and certainly hope you’re right about the possibility of an insanity defense working. I wouldn’t want to see that. Realistically though, the bigger danger is that the public starts to pity him for being suicidal. By acting as if he is suicidal — forcing him to sleep naked will count as proof in many minds of his suicidal thoughts — the military almost forces Americans to believe there’s a good reason for it.
Bottom line, this is a double-edged sword.
— UP
UP, I hear ya. I guess his nekkid sleeping practices may have something to do with the Brig Commander doing a CYA, as others have mentioned? You know how the military does the 100 pounds of prevention for an ounce of cure.
I’m just sayin……
Uber Pig,
All this drama with Manning is just that: orchestrated drama that serves to distract folks from other events, non-events like our support for democracy in the Middle East.
You’ll notice Manning gets more press than Hasan or Akbar, or any of the other convicted or accused criminals combined. Manson and Mumia are jealous. What will tomorrow’s outrage be? Burnt peas and cold carrots? His attorney won’t get to grind a deposition out of former SecDef Rumsfeld? No way does his attorney want a speedy trial. His attorney, and the prosecution will everything they can to prevent an actual trial because they can’t guarantee a result.
BLUF: we will pay for this child until the day he dies. If the kid harms himself, we pay for his medical, psychiatric/psychological counseling, and well-being. If the kid is perceived to have suffered harm, we pay to fight perception. If the kid gets 3 hots and a cot, we pay. If the kid goes on to life in prison (life being either a term of years, or actual life w/o parole), we pay. Whether his trial comes tomorrow, or ten years from now, we the people lose and will pay. If Manning is acquitted, whether by jury vote or by technicality, the lawsuit will be tremendous, and we will pay.
I see someone being piled on, and just have to come running.
First, let me say that I appreciate what Uber Pig is doing: taking a balanced, clear look at the situation. He’s not saying “Manning is a hero who should be freed immediately”, and he’s not saying “Manning is Satan Incarnate and should be tortured slowly before ultimately being shot in the head.” He’s saying, hey, look. We’re Americans, and we follow the rule of law, and the rule of law says we’re not supposed to do shit like this.
As it is, I happen to agree with him. The conditions of Manning’s confinement aren’t being defined by his potential suicide risk, and I think everyone here being honest with themselves know that. They’re being defined by the fact that people are royally, horrifically, pissed at this dude for leaking information and for what has happened because of it. People are angry.
This reminds me of Arlo Guthrie..
Obie said he was making sure, and friends, Obie was, cause he took out the toilet seat so I couldn’t hit myself over the head and drown, and he took out the toilet paper so I couldn’t bend the bars, roll the toilet paper out the window, slide down the roll and have an escape. Obie was making sure..
Yeah, my first impulse too, if someone said they could kill themselves, would be to say “Ah-ha, sucker, try NOW, smartass.” But that is my inner, sadistic impulse, and I would govern it, if I were in charge of watching over someone. These people seem like they’re not bothering to curb their impulses, which is not the way that we all commit to act. We commit to act as servicemembers to obey our better angels, not our worse.
UP- I’m sorry to tell you, but suicidality does not equal insanity….not in the eyes of the DSM-IV, not in the eyes of mental health professionals, and not in the eyes of the law.
Anonymous,
Yes, I agree with you. Suicidality, or suicidal ideation, does not necessarily equal insanity in the eyes of the law, or in the eyes of the people who wrote DSM-IV. But it may cause the American public to sympathize with PFC Manning and object to his treatment. If you want to pretend that suicidal ideation cannot be a contributing piece of evidence that may effectively be used by his defense team in an insanity plea, you’re living in fucking Kandyland.
Bottom line is the military is treating him as a suicidal detainee. He is not suicidal, at least according to the Army’s own psychiatrist. And this makes the Army’s job in prosecuting Manning even harder than it is.
Again, as far as I can see, the only evidence against him comes from a convicted felon named Adrian Lamo.
Please see comment 38. It sums up my argument nicely.
— Uber Pig