Manning hearing focuses on digital footprints

Army Pfc. Bradley Manning is escorted from a security vehicle to a courthouse in Fort Meade, Md., Dec. 19, 2011. / AP Photo

Updated at 2:54 p.m. ET

FORT MEADE, Md. - Military prosecutors and defense lawyers tangled Monday over digital evidence against an Army intelligence analyst charged with massively leaking secret U.S. data to WikiLeaks, while his supporters fumed that the public was shut out as the hearing dealt with classified but widely publicized information.

As Pfc. Bradley Manning's preliminary hearing carried on for a fourth day, the government had called 15 of an expected 21 witnesses. Expected to last several more days, the hearing at an Army installation near Washington is to determine whether Manning should be court-martialed on 22 charges, including aiding the enemy. If convicted, the 24-year-old native of Crescent, Okla., could face life in prison.

Special Section: WikiLeaks
"Emotional distress" key to Manning defense
Testimony on Manning's access to secrets

Monday's testimony focused on a forensic examination of Manning's two workplace computers, which a government witness said contained 110,000 State Department diplomatic cables.

On cross-examination, though, digital-crimes investigator David Shaver testified there was little indication the cables were disseminated. Some of those cables didn't match any of those published by WikiLeaks. He said 10,000 were in a corrupted file that could only be opened with special tools, possibly explaining why they weren't released, he said. At least 100,000 couldn't be matched to Manning's user profile and may not have been sent anywhere.

In camouflaged Army fatigues and dark rimmed-glasses, Manning was more animated Monday, conferring more often with his defense attorneys. He had sat calmly through most of the weekend, listening intently to the witnesses and occasionally writing on a pad of paper. He hasn't spoken in the last three days, except when he has leaned over to consult with his military lawyers or civilian attorney, David Coombs, and always after switching off the defense table microphone for privacy.

The hearing is taking place in a small courtroom with seats for only about 50. Seven of the witnesses testified by phone from Hawaii, Germany, Arizona and other locations, their voices coming over a speaker phone on the witness stand. Computer logs and other evidence documents are projected on two large-screen monitors.

Manning is accused of illegally leaking a trove of secret information that surfaced on WikiLeaks, a breach that rattled U.S. foreign relations and, according to the government, imperiled valuable military and diplomatic sources.

Defense attorneys argue the leaked material did little or no damage to U.S. interests. But a decision by the presiding officer, Paul Almanza, to remove spectators and reporters for a half-hour of the hearing Monday morning augured poorly for Manning's defense.

By ruling the diplomatic and military information in question should somehow remain secret, even though it has been published by media around the world, Almanza effectively undermined the defense argument that no harm was done and the information might as well be public.

Manning supporters fumed. The defense already has appealed for Almanza to be removed from the case because of his civilian job with the Justice Department, which is conducting a separate investigation of WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange.

Almanza "is seeking to prevent journalists and the public from reporting on testimony related to materials that are already in the public domain," lamented a group called the Bradley Manning Support Network. It also complained that unnamed "relevant government agencies" were not included in the blackout.

Two supporters had run-ins with military police Monday. Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg was escorted out of court when he approached Manning during a recess to introduce himself. He was later allowed to return. But Daniel Choi — a soldier kicked out of the military under the now-repealed policy against gays serving openly — was ejected from the base after allegedly ignoring a warning not to heckle military police, according to defense officials.

Shaver's testimony Sunday illustrated how the government connected the dots in its case accusing Manning of committing traitorous leaks from his perch as an intelligence analyst in Baghdad.

He told the hearing that in addition to thousands of State Department cables, he found several versions of a deadly 2007 helicopter attack video and secret assessments of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, terrorist detainees. He also said he discovered evidence that someone had used the computer to streamline the downloading of cables with the apparent aim of "moving them out."

All the material was linked to the username "bradley.manning" or Manning's user profile, Shaver said. And the other computer was used to conduct scores of online searches for the anti-secrecy web site WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, he said.

Another investigator, civilian contractor Mark Johnson, testified Monday that he found records on Manning's personal computer of Internet chats in which the defendant confessed to leaking the information. Manning's online correspondent was Adrian Lamo, a former hacker, who gave the chat logs to authorities, leading to Manning's arrest in May 2010.

Manning's lawyers have neither acknowledged nor denied that the intelligence analyst was behind the leaks.

• no previous page
• next

1/2

[expatriate2]

One cannot view the Manning case without recalling Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. In Ellsberg's case, the charges were actually more serious since the papers were listed as "Top Secret" and he was in jeopardy of being sentenced to 115 years in prison. His claim that Americans had the right to know the subversive actions of their government was ignored but eventually all the charges were dismissed because of the misconduct of the government toward Ellsberg during the time of his indictment.
In Manning's case, the information also dealt with a wide range of information including atrocities committed by U.S. forces in Iraq. There are those, even posting here, who seem to believe that if a document is classified, it means that it relates to national security rather than an outright coverup. Unfortunately, that is not always true. To expand the concept of secrecy to the intent to conceal truth from the public has no relationship to national security, rather to national corruption and the wrong exercise of power.
Some of the world's best minds have petitioned that the treatment of Manning while in confinement was not only unconstitutional, but represented open misconduct, like the Ellsberg case. President Obama has already declared him guilty which, in itself, is an intrusion upon Manning's right to a fair trial.
There will be much more to come of this but I sense that he has been given a completely inept legal representation that is beginning to show in their suggested defense.

[Agustin64]

Benedict Arnold was executed for 1/1000 of the crime committed by this individual. I'm gay is not a valid excuse. He is in the military and it is up to the military to punish traitors in a time of war. Anything less opens the door for future unauthorized disclosure.