According to Bradley Manning’s lawyer David E. Coombs, the US government is deliberately withholding evidence that the defense has requested during discovery, including evidence that could be favorable to Manning’s case.
According to Coombs, this includes internal government reports which contradict one another about the leaks and reports which were never released but publicly downplayed the “damage” done by the leaks Manning is accused of. The later could be used to prevent the government’s witnesses from claiming the damage was broader than the official reports indicate.
Click here to read more from Wired
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- Ukraine's President-Elect Demands Sanctions Against Russia Over Passports - April 24th, 2019
- Kim Visits Russia to Meet Putin on Nuclear, Peace Process - April 24th, 2019
- Iran FM Calls for Prisoner Swap With US - April 24th, 2019
- Iran FM: Trump Aims for Talks, Bolton Wants Conflict - April 24th, 2019
- ISIS Battles Taliban for Control of Eastern Afghanistan Villages - April 24th, 2019
The government can't produce credible evidence against Manning when they have none to begin with.
If they had any kind of solid case this would have been in court months ago. That it appears they don't have the evidence to convict him in a military court and they needed to torture him trying to get more evidence, they're still trying to get Assange here by hook or crook in an attempt to bolster the case. All they've got are the supposed chat logs of a convicted felon who told about 10 different contradicting stories to what were in the logs. But they're letting Manning rot rather than give him his day in court or see justice done. Kind of sums up the USG and its military.Those of us who are sick of what this country has become have no rights they respect.
They can't produce evidence they haven't yet finished creating.
So, under USC art 6 Manning gets a speedy trial – right? Looks to me like time for a motion to dismiss. Withholding exculpatory evidence is a contempt of court matter and another basis for both appeal and motion for dismissal – or are we in the Third Reich?