So if you can use this as a defense.

jaminjim

Veteran Expediter
Why should you be allowed to serve in the military. It seems that the gay community want it both ways. If the Army had booted him from his intel job because he was gay, civil rights people would have been up in arms. If they kept him in his job they wouldn't be able to blame him for treasonous acts.

Manning's status as gay soldier is key to defense

By PAULINE JELINEK
The Associated Press

FORT MEADE, Md. — Lawyers representing the young Army intelligence specialist accused of leaking U.S. military and diplomatic secrets are arguing his personal struggles with being a gay soldier influenced his actions as a military hearing that could lead to his court martial enters its third day.

Prosecutors at the pretrial hearing are expected to call more witnesses Sunday as they build their case to connect Manning to the publication of the material by WikiLeaks. The hearing is being held at a post outside Washington to determine whether Manning will be court-martialed on 22 counts, including aiding the enemy. Manning, who turned 24 on Saturday, could face a term of life in prison as a traitor.

The Obama administration says the released information has threatened valuable military and diplomatic sources and strained America's relations with other governments. Manning's lawyers counter that much of the information that was classified by the Pentagon posed no risk.

But among the first issues to arise on Saturday was whether Manning's sexual orientation is relevant to the case against him. His attorneys maintained that his status as a homosexual in the military before the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" contributed to mental and emotional problems that should have barred him from having access to sensitive material.

The defense revealed that Manning had written to one of his supervisors in Baghdad before his arrest, saying he was suffering from gender-identity disorder. He included a picture of himself dressed as a woman and talked about how it was affecting his ability to do his job and even think clearly.

Maj. Matthew Kemkes, one of Manning's lawyers, asked Special Agent Toni Graham, an Army criminal investigator, whether she had talked to people who believed Manning was gay or found evidence among his belongings relating to gender-identity disorder. The condition often is described as a mental diagnosis in which people believe they were born the wrong sex.

Graham said such questions were irrelevant to the investigation.

"We already knew before we arrived that Pfc. Manning was a homosexual," Graham said.

Prosecutors objected several times to the questions. Kemkes responded that if the government can argue that Manning intended to leak secrets, "what is going on in my client's mind is very important."

During cross-examination of Treasury Department Special Agent Troy Bettencourt, who investigated the case, defense attorney Capt. Paul Bouchard asked if he believed Manning's military leaders failed him, given his behavior such as overturning a table and throwing a chair in episodes of rage.

Bettencourt said that in hindsight, "I would like to think that had I been in the chain of command, I would have maybe done things differently. I would have been aware of everything we now know to prevent him from deploying — but that is with the benefit of hindsight."

Prosecutor Capt. Joe Morrow quickly asked Bettencourt if he believes people who have signed nondisclosure agreements, like Manning, "have an individual responsibility to safeguard classified information." Bettencourt replied, "Yes."

One of Manning's commanders in Baghdad, Capt. Steven Lim, said Manning should have had his security clearance suspended because of his problems. Lim said the outbursts occurred before he arrived, and that when he learned of them after Manning's arrest, he was shocked. Lim said he was also unaware that Manning believed he was suffering from gender-identity disorder.

Manning's appearances over the last two days in the Fort Meade courtroom marked the first time he has been seen in public after 19 months in detention. The Oklahoma native comes to court in Army camouflage fatigues and wearing dark-rimmed glasses. Manning sat calmly in the courtroom Saturday without appearing to react to the testimony, even when centered on his troubled mental state and homosexuality. Manning listened intently and regularly took notes.

The case has spawned an international support network of people who believe the U.S. government has gone too far in seeking to punish Manning.

___

December 18, 2011 05:41 AM EST

Manning's status as gay soldier is key to defense *| ajc.com
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Not an answer to your question, but I noticed this:

"The hearing is being held at a post outside Washington to determine whether Manning will be court-martialed on 22 counts, including aiding the enemy."

Looks like the State may be considering going for the full enchilada .... sad if they do, it would be a real travesty of justice (IMHO)
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
The government should just concentrate on the leaks...and ignore the gay issue IF they can or at least minimize it....IF they were classified documents...the public has NO right to them...it is a military issue...
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
It not an issue IF the citizens should have access to the information but whether or not the information is actually harmful to the country.

I oppose leaking information but all for open access to much of it.

As for the Gay thing, sorry if one is to use the defense of being gay made him do it whether or not it is in civilian or military court, then the entire issue of being gay returns back to an issue of being gay is a mental defect.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
It not an issue IF the citizens should have access to the information but whether or not the information is actually harmful to the country.

I oppose leaking information but all for open access to much of it.

As for the Gay thing, sorry if one is to use the defense of being gay made him do it whether or not it is in civilian or military court, then the entire issue of being gay returns back to an issue of being gay is a mental defect.

I am surprised the gay community would back him...it sets the issue back in time..
 

charlies1gal

Seasoned Expediter
First I don't think everthing should be out in the open, because there are way too many people with mental issues out here. As far as the young person on trial, if you notice the wording you will see they have Gender Dysphoria, the soldier is NOT GAY!! He was born into the incorrect sex. This is the same thing that Chaz Bono is dealing with. It also is NO defence for TREASON. There are many Gender Dysphoric people who NEVER commit crimes!! I am not gender dysphoric, but have a gay daughter & love her enough to have taken the initiative to learn about how she has evolved!!
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Well I'm wondering why I got those "likes"...


OVM,
Of course the gay community would back him, no matter what you call it - having problems with gender may not be an actual gay issue but may be a medical/mental issue depending on the person (not saying that it is a mental defect).

The same goes for some of the perverted groups within the Gay community, they lump themselves all together and expect acceptance and use it as a defense on many fronts. BUT until there is a showing from the community itself to rid themselves of the harmful (for all of us) groups, then using any defense (while defining it any which way) for something seriously high profile like this can't be taken seriously by the general population.
 

scottm4211

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
I think the whole idea when someone is accused of something and trying to get off is to throw everything out there, and hope some of it sticks.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Bradley Manning is the GLBT Community's worse nightmare. Shortly after Manning was arrested and his personal situation with his homosexuality and gender confusion came out, you could hear nothing but crickets at the various GLBT Web sites. The government wouldn't address it either. Because, it was all mired in the bog of repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". Despite Manning admitting that he released the documents in part as a way to get back at or punish the military for DADT, the Gay Community didn't want to touch it out of fear that the repealing of DADT would be in jeopardy, and the government didn't want to be perceived as persecuting Manning because he is gay.

I expected the government to either do their best to try and make the case without introducing Manning's disdain of the DADT policy, or go ahead and introduce it as a motive.

But in a surprising turn of events, it's the defense who introduces Manning's "gayness" as a mitigating factor, as an excuse for failing to do his job and for failing to live up to the non-disclosure agreement that he signed and agreed to, and in effect (and literally) saying that gays should not be trusted in sensitive military positions. Wow.

I'm sure the GLBT Community is just all giddy over that one. <snort>
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
If he did not agree with DADT he should not have joined. He knew prior to joining what the rules were at the time. By joining he accepted them.

If he did no wish to live up to his duties he should not have joined. If he could not live up to the non-disclosure requirements he should not have signed it.

It is not difficult to live up to military life. Our military is a 100% volunteer force. No longer is anyone forced to enlist. Why then, knowing the conditions would he join? Was his intent to cause trouble from day one? It is a possibility.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
If he did not agree with DADT he should not have joined. He knew prior to joining what the rules were at the time. By joining he accepted them.
Seems so simple, doesn't it?

If he did no wish to live up to his duties he should not have joined. If he could not live up to the non-disclosure requirements he should not have signed it.

It is not difficult to live up to military life. Our military is a 100% volunteer force. No longer is anyone forced to enlist. Why then, knowing the conditions would he join? Was his intent to cause trouble from day one? It is a possibility.
Based on comments from his friends and from his own Facebook page, it would seem to be far more than just a possibility. His "alter ego", the lovely Breanna Manning, also said as much in e-mails and Twitter.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
First I don't think everthing should be out in the open, because there are way too many people with mental issues out here. As far as the young person on trial, if you notice the wording you will see they have Gender Dysphoria, the soldier is NOT GAY!! He was born into the incorrect sex. This is the same thing that Chaz Bono is dealing with. It also is NO defence for TREASON. There are many Gender Dysphoric people who NEVER commit crimes!! I am not gender dysphoric, but have a gay daughter & love her enough to have taken the initiative to learn about how she has evolved!!

There is no such thing as "being born into the wrong sex." That's laughable and preposterous. You are the sex your DNA says you are, and if you have sexual relations with someone of the same sex, you're a homosexual. Period. Full stop.

Manning is being punished for embarrassing the US government, nothing more.

--

You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
"Well I'm wondering why I got those "likes"... "
In my case, because I generally agree with your sentiments ;)

It not an issue IF the citizens should have access to the information but whether or not the information is actually harmful to the country.

I oppose leaking information but all for open access to much of it.
Yup - agreed.

It's fairly common knowledge that we have a major problems with over-classification - it's readily acknowledged both in and out of government.

Having looked at some of the material that was released and read reporting on it, it's clear that much of it contained embarrassing info .... some of it contained evidence of actual criminal activity (which often gets a pass when it's the government or it's flunkies committing the crimes) ...... but woe unto any who embarrass the State, and dare to show that the Emperor has no clothes .....

As rather smart fellow noted, society or nation which does which does not have a well-informed citizenry, is one that is headed for trouble (if not actually already butt-deep in it):

“In a free society we're supposed to know the truth,” Dr. Ron Paul said. “In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble.

And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it.”

And that's why I think it would be a travesty for this misguided soul to lose his life over this - whatever you think of his various inclinations and confusions, to some extent, he has probably performed a public service to the citizens of this country.

As for the Gay thing, sorry if one is to use the defense of being gay made him do it whether or not it is in civilian or military court, then the entire issue of being gay returns back to an issue of being gay is a mental defect.
Yup - defect or mental illness.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Manning is being punished for embarrassing the US government, nothing more.

Manning is being prosecuted for allegedly breaking several laws. If convicted, he will the be punished.

The oath that Manning took was clear. The agreements that he signed were clear. I know, I took that same oath and signed those same agreements. If he brook laws, ignored agreements or breached his oath he deserves what ever punishment he receives.

There is no excuse, he choose freely to accept those conditions for service. If he did not agree with those conditions he should not have signed on the dotted line.

Honor and integrity are very important.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
If he brook laws, ignored agreements or breached his oath he deserves whateverpunishment he receives.
Not necessarily the case - because it assumes that the punishment always fits the crime, is always just.

And that one is always appropriately charged for the act.

Honor and integrity are very important.
Certainly true ..... in fact, sometimes they actually far more important than complying with the law.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Not necessarily the case - because it assumes that the punishment always fits the crime, is always just.

And that one is always appropriately charged for the act.


Certainly true ..... in fact, sometimes they actually far more important than complying with the law.


When are you going to buy me the boat I need?
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
But in many ways honor and integrity means standing up for something you are passionate about. I don't feel honor is bestowed upon people for taking an oath but to hold true to that oath at all times - they all have to earn it.

Not talking to Manning or knowing how his mind works, I don't know his motivations but I do know that some of the things that have been secret or deemed sealed for a national interest have zero to do with actual protection of the country.

There are a lot of examples, from Rev King's FBI files (which are not of a national interest) to intel and information about the first world war. In the case of manning, I don't find him at fault for much of what I did in the past mainly because I took an objective look at the system and found serious flaws with it, which concern me more than the actual release of the information.

BUT the question should be on everyone's mind - does the system we have right now, this second actually conducive to protecting us or does it have more to do with protecting those who hold power that we are afraid to take away and return back to the people?
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
When are you going to buy me the boat I need?
I generally don't make it a practice to respond to non-sequitur communication .... but I will for you this one time, just to let you know that I generally don't.

BTW, great response - thoughtful, substantive, and most of all, insightful :p
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I generally don't make it a practice to respond to non-sequitur communication .... but I will for you this one time, just to let you know that I generally don't.

BTW, great response - thoughtful, substantive, and most of all, insightful :p

I was just trying to insure that neither you nor I "earn"[/B
"vacations" from E.O. If I were to respond otherwise that would likely happen.
 
Top