Charge sheet (HTML)

This charge sheet was the initial charge sheet produced at the time of Bradley’s arrest in Iraq, and it has been superseded / replaced (and not added to) by the new 2011 charge sheet — which are the charges Bradley will face at court martial. The new updated charge sheet can be accessed here

 

CHARGE I: VIOLATION OF THE UCMJ, ARTICLE 92

SPECIFICATION 1: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: Paragraph 4-6(k), Army Regulation 25-2, dated 24 October 2007, by wrongfully introducing a classified video of a military operation filmed at or near Baghdad, Iraq, on or about 12 July 2007, onto his personal computer, a non-secure information system.

SPECIFICATION 2: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: Paragraph 4-6(k), Army Regulation 25-2, dated 24 October 2007, by wrongfully introducing more than 50 classified United States Department of State cables onto his personal computer, a non-secure information system.

SPECIFICATION 3: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: Paragraph 4-6(k), Army Regulation 25-2, dated 24 October 2007, by wrongfully introducing a classified Microsoft Office PowerPoint presentation onto his personal computer, a non-secure information system.

SPECIFICATION 4: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 3 April 2010, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: Paragraph 4-5(a)(3), Army Regulation 25-2, dated 24 October 2007, by wrongfully adding unauthorized software to a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer.

CHARGE II: VIOLATION OF THE UCMJ, ARTICLE 134

SPECFICATION 1: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 5 April 2010, have unauthorized possession of photographs relating to the national defense, to wit: a classified video of a military operation filmed at or near Baghdad, Iraq, on or about 12 July 2007, and did willfully communicate, deliver and transmit the video, or cause the video to be communicated, delivered, and transmitted, to a person not entitled to receive it, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 793(e), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

SPECIFICATION 2: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 5 April 2010, knowingly exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive Order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense, to wit: a classified video of a military operation filmed at or near Baghdad, Iraq, on or about 12 July 2007, and did willfully communicate, deliver and transmit the video, or cause the video to be communicated, delivered and transmitted, to a person not entitled to receive it, with reason to believe that such information could be used to the injury of the United States or the advantage of any foreign nation, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(1), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

SPECIFICATION 3: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 13 January 2010 and on or about 19 February 2010, knowingly exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive Order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of foreign relations, to wit: a classified United States Department of State cable titled “Reykjavik 13,” and did willfully communicate, deliver and transmit the cable, or cause the cable to be communicated, delivered, and transmitted, to a person not entitled to receive it, with reason to believe that such information could be used to the injury of the United States or the advantage of any foreign nation, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(1), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

SPECIFICATION 4: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 24 May 2010, knowingly exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive Order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of foreign relations, to wit: more than 50 classified United States Department of State cables, and did willfully communicate, deliver and transmit the cables, or cause the cables to be communicated, delivered, and transmitted, to a person not entitled to receive them, with reason to believe that such information could be used to the injury of the United States or the advantage of any foreign nation, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(1), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

SPECIFICATION 5: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 5 April 2010, intentionally exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain information from the United States Department of Defense, to wit: a classified video of a military operation filmed at or near Baghdad, Iraq, on or about 12 July 2007, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(2), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

SPECIFICATION 6: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 13 January 2010 and on or about 19 February 2010, intentionally exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain information from the United States Department of State, to wit: a classified cable titled “Reykjavik 13,” in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(2), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

SPECIFICATION 7: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, on divers occasions, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010, intentionally exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain information from an the United States Department of State, to wit: more than 150,000 diplomatic cables, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(2), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

SPECIFICATION 8: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, on divers occasions, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010, intentionally exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain information from the United States Department of Defense, to wit: a classified Microsoft Office PowerPoint presentation, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(2), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

 

51 thoughts on “Charge sheet (HTML)

  1. This line really gets me
    …being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
    I have watched the video a few times, I could not spot any weapons.
    The people seemed to be quietly going about their business, no riots or waving weapons, just innocent people getting butchered.
    What discredits the armed forces is allowing this kind of murder then covering it up.
    Is prosecuting someone who has the bravery to expose this kind of insanity somehow going to make the armed forces more credible?
    Release the hero and take another look at aptly named crazy horse who seemed to think it was fun to slaughter people from the safety of an apache helicopter.

    • with @Ray here.
      The line “to bring discredit upon the armed forces”, would seem to be the key point here. So if the actions of the armed forces depicted on the material disclosed are to be found to be of the nature “to bring discredit upon the armed forces”, then Mr. Manning needs to be found guilty. Of course that would at the same time mean admitting that the actions of the armed forces, depicted without the PR, are of the nature that would bring them discredit.

    • @ray – While I agree with the leaking of this video, you have to take it from a soldier’s perspective.

      The cameras appear to be weapons. It’s somewhat hard to tell over those videos, and soldiers have to make a choice between risking the lives of their fellow soldiers by not taking action, or by taking action. They should have stopped once that van pulled up, and let ground troops take it from there, that I’ll agree with 100%.

      I don’t believe this soldier should be charged with as much as he’s being charged with, but I also don’t think someone who does break federal law should get away with it.

      • I’m not sure why you think that breaking laws is always bad. I guess you approve of Nelson Mandela being locked away for 27 years as well?

        • Vegan – I never said breaking the law is always bad.
          Some laws shouldn’t be broken though.

          While I don’t think this should be considered treason, it should be considered what it is. Someone going against the policies set in place, moving information to where it should be, and that sort of stuff.

          • Perhaps he should have at least TRIED to go through proper channels when he discovered the video. That would have put pressure on those up the chain of command to take an active position one way or the other. Releasing top secret information to the public just because he had a different view than those who classified it is a dangerous precedent. Perhaps this matter was already being addressed; perhaps it had gone unnoticed or even been covered up by making it classified — point is, he was a soldier who had channels available to address the issue within the law and he chose not to use them.

  2. Pingback: Twitted by soupermom

  3. @Panze: That’s not what’s being said by the charge at all.

    Those charges incorporating that language fall under the “general violations” section of the UCMJ, which includes things like getting drunk with a prisoner, appearing in public with a ripped and filthy uniform, prostitution and so on. The nexus here between the UCMJ and the US Code is that the UCMJ provides for additional penalties for servicemembers convicted of breaking federal and state law. Manning is charged by reference with espionage and computer crimes; the language of the charge suggests that his alleged conduct thereby brings “discredit upon the armed forces”.

    That said, I get the spirit of what you mean.

  4. What’s the evidence that Bradley Manning exists?

    How do we know that this isn’t part of the US effort to discredit Wikileaks?

  5. @Gozu: I assign a very, very high probability to Manning’s existence. That said, we also know that this is a part of the US effort to discredit WikiLeaks. Manning’s existence doesn’t preclude that.

  6. Pingback: Was sonst noch passierte : netzpolitik.org

  7. Pingback: U.S. Intelligence Analyst Arrested in Wikileaks Video Probe - Page 5 - Why We Protest | Activism Forum

  8. Thank God for wikileaks….seems leakers need to be quiet :-) Boasting seems to be the only thing Manning is guilty of.

  9. @Eddie: A fair point, I think, could be made either way. I’m not dogmatic about it, and it’s not my focus in this matter, either.

    @Laura: Amen, though I don’t read Manning from the published chat logs as starting out intending to boast, but rather desperately needing to reach out and make human contact with someone who might be sympathetic. And for that, may the name “Adrian Lamo” be inscribed above that of Benedict Arnold for posterity.

  10. @Mike Gogulski, Oh, I see. I don’t know anything about the chats. I am so focused on other issues, such as ending apartheid in Gaza, that I don’t have enough time for researching Manning. I will try to learn more. I am sure Adrian Lamo will be richly rewarded by the sockpuppets of satan who pass out baubles and beads to everybody who helps hide the Truth. He is definitely in their ranks now. He sold his soul.

  11. divert our attention- forget the message and kill the messenger. this man had the guts to expose the wanton killing machine and deserves our thanks.

    • @Lonna – I wouldn’t quite call it wanton.
      As I said above, look at it from a soldiers perspective.

      The area this took place in had been a hotzone recently. American, and NATO troops had been fired at, some were injured and a few unlucky soldiers were killed.

      These soldiers see people walking with what appear to be weapons.
      They have to make a very quick choice, and they decided to not risk that these people may be trying to kill their buddies.

      I think that they should have not fired on the van, and instead waited on the ground troops who were not too far away at the time to get there. And I may sound callous about it, but the guy in the van should NOT have tried to help while he had his children with him. If he had been alone, I could understand it. But you ~never~ risk your child’s life if you can help it.

      It’s so very easy for all of us to sit here and say “I would have done ~~~~~” or “I wouldn’t have ~~~~~”. But in reality, unless you’ve been in a warzone, seen your friends shot, been shot at, and gone through it all… You can’t say for certain what you would do. What would I have done? I don’t know. I may have made the same choice and opened fire. I may have held off and waited for something to happen. None of us know what we would do.

      As for Manning, I do think he did a decent thing with releasing this video. And I don’t think he should be charged with anything too serious.

      • @Eddie: You said, “They have to make a very quick choice, and they decided to not risk that these people may be trying to kill their buddies.”

        Funny, all that danger to their “buddies” and pressure to make quick decision, and yet they weren’t so stressed as to not get a laugh out it?

        Quote: “You can’t say for certain what you would do.” Really? Well, let me reassure you, I would have done nothing to harm those people. I would never have been there. These wars have stunk of criminality right from the start.

        HOWEVER, if I were privy to the information Bradley is alleged to have leaked, I can promise you, I would have blown it to high heaven. I dare you to give me some damaging content.

        • “Funny, all that danger to their “buddies” and pressure to make quick decision, and yet they weren’t so stressed as to not get a laugh out it?”
          You have never been in combat. Adrenalin does some very strange things to soldiers in combat.

          • Well Felix I am a soldier. Ive been in combat. Ive lost friends. Ive shot and been shot at. Yes adrenaline does do strange things, but when you have a 30mm chain gun, hellfire missle’s and 70mm folding fin aerial rockets, restraint is nessacary. Rules of engagment, and proper target identification are essential in warfare the subject’s show did not display hostile action, or hostile intent. I also garauntee with the amount of blue force assets on the ground there was a UAV in the air that could have confirmed their ID. In combat timing is important but when you kill civilians you just create more enemies.

  12. Pingback: Another Wikileaks Exposure: The Lady Gaga-National Security Vulnerability - Swampland - TIME.com

  13. As the first commenter suggests, The United States Government could not discredit its military any more than the actions of this soldier did and the evidence for it is in the video.

  14. Oops, that came out wrong. The discredit the US Gov’t has brought on itself (as observed in the video) can never be equaled by the acts of any one soldier. Killing civilians and covering it up is a far worse crime than leaking the truth.

  15. I think you are a very brave man. you are a real hero, a special person with a sense of justice, with the internal desire to do right. My philosophy can be said in three words, CHOOSE THE RIGHT. YOU DID IT!!. You did what Christ will do in those circumstances. I’m just wondering how many cases like these we have not seen? Probably hundred of innocents killed. you deserve freedom and an apology from the government. And from all those that have condemned your actions. We will pray for you and we will ask for your release. I hope that other honorable soldiers will follow your example. God will be with you no matter what.

  16. Pingback: WILILEAKS PREPARES DOCUMENT DUMPS ON IRAQ AND DIPLOMACY « EUROPE TURKMEN FRIENDSHIPS

  17. Pingback: WikiLeaks Iraq Cache More Than Three Times As Big « Margot B. News

  18. I am from India, Hyderabad. The police and govt of India since sonia gandhi (Italy born but indian political head backed by US) have killed more than 40000 people(minimal estimate under the name of Communists, Terrorist,fundamentalists etc etc. Hope atleast one in the Military and police have the guts to put a few videos on the internet where people are taken captive to the jungle near by and shot dead with a gun in hand (Aka the recent nigerian killings by the police captured by aljajeera).

  19. Sameer…can you post that on facebook? There are some nice groups there who discuss these things. I generally read the groups supporting Palestine and I learned a lot about what is going on there. I imagine there are some groups there, if not, start one. Americans are generally nice folks. Unfortunately the evil 1% billionaire psychopath money worshippers now own our schools, justice system, medicine, banks, places of worship, mass media, and the government. They keep killing people globally so they can profit off the stolen natural resources and human life. So…..we generally either pretend we are free or we are cows who think we are. I know it is hard for those outside USA to understand our ignorance. There really are decent, intelligent folks here but they don’t get much media exposure.

    Bradley Manning is in God’s army….too bad he got tricked into being in the billionaire’s army. GOD BLESS AMERICA….Save us from the liars.

  20. If we assume he did what the military is accusing him, he only acted as a human in a field where no human shall be a human. Particularly, a gov. institution like the fed. army shall be transparent to the society, since we are the tax payer…. What did the young soldier do? He was brave and served the army – and he had the courage to stand up when other soldiers were torturing..when someone takes an ethical stance are sending him to jail, but when you abuse the enemies – referring to Brigadier General Janis Karpinski – HALLO PEOPLE ….in what kind of world are we living?

    It’s time that the american people wake up and stand up for what the constitution stands for…I would like to encourage each earthling to demonstrate for his/her individual freedom, however, particularly for Bradley Manning. He is innocent and has learned his lesson. The scope of his trail is vast..it might encompass debates about the future battles and to role of the media to have more information and transparency…hopefully the United States Secretary of Defense and the Senate Armed Services Committee will have a human heart and understand his actions……jurisprudence please do him good!!

  21. They got him under UCMJ Article 134, for those of you who don’t know what that is, its colloquially called the “catch-all” article. Essentially if your “crime” doesn’t fall under any of the other articles of the code, they can charge you with 134 because its vaguely written to include anything you want to charge him/her with…

  22. Pingback: Who Is Julian Assange? | Prose Before Hos

  23. ….. delivered and transmitted, to a person not entitled to receive it …..

    Last I knew, these videos were made mandatory for the purpose of reviewing army soldiers actions, to prevent criminal activity and to aid in the prosecution of war crimes committed by US Army personnel? Surely that would mean anyone and everyone was entitled to receive this video would it not?

    What on earth would be the point in having video evidence of conduct during a combat situation, if it were not for public scrutiny and for the courts to decide whether or not an offence was committed?

    Bringing discredit on the US Army is pointless these days, with friendly fire, civilian casualties in most altercations, and claiming evidence of WMDs that must have been vaporised by Captain Kirk on one of his time-warping away missions, because they were never found, the US Army has discredited itself more than enough for the for-seeable future. If an Army cannot be held accountable for it’s actions, it is not an Army, it is simply a gathering of heathens with guns and helicopters.

    IF they can PROVE Bradley did ANYTHING, then the charge sheet should contain nothing more than first time offences, relating directly to computer crime, which are punishable mostly by a slap on the wrist. I doubt they can even prove he actually committed a computer related crime (Such as hacking, circumventing encryption or other security measures) the log (IF real) suggests that the document(s) were sat on a virtually open server, that he had access to, therefore he committed no electronic crime at all, since he had full authorative access and clearance for the material he was dealing with, he has done nothing more than report a crime through unconventional methods, because it had already been made clear to him, that the conventional ones were closed and not open to such a report! He mentioned AES256 in the alleged logs, if indeed he cracked it, he does not belong in prison, he belongs in the CIA or the NSA!

    I agree that pilots and soldiers have to make snap decisions, but my snap decision, whilst in an armoured, very heavily armed helicopter, would have been to simply follow the normal rules of engagement, thus, not requesting permission to engage someone who has not engaged you, but if engaged, returning fire. The assault on the van is nothing more than a disgusting want for target practice and utter destruction.

    Someone about to fire an RPG, who is in clear view, is warrant enough to return fire, and the intention would be very clear, no such event occurred, hence the repeated requests for permission to engage, rather than just engaging, it was pure panic and paranoia that prompted this attack to begin, nothing more. Under no circumstances should the van have been fired upon, they were clearly doing nothing more than trying to rescue the man who was clearly badly injured, not holding a weapon, and no one, I repeat, NO ONE was firing on the helicopter or ground troops in that vicinity, at that time, who cares if he was in fact an insurgent getting away? He did not fire on the helicopter or ground troops at any time, and the only thing the ground troops would do when they arrived would be transport him to a hospital, the troops on the helicopter clearly just wanted to make sure their “kill” was actually dead, like shooting a deer between the eyes when you have only wounded it on your first attempt.

  24. Pingback: Brad Manning Has Rights! | The Liberty Voice

  25. I wonder, if the crew of the helicopter had undergone any military investigation immediatly after their combat action, because their war crimes are obvious and documented by camera? And have they been charged for having brought discredit upon the armed forces of America?

    @ Mindsurge: As a former (medical) officer in the german army I don´t think Bradley should have tried to go through proper channels in order to indicate these war crimes. His effort would have been futile. The only way, that he could be sure, was to expose it openly.

    In my opinion Bradley is brave young man and he deserves our respect for what he has done.

  26. All tax payers and voters have the right to know. They have the right to their government employees and politicians accountable and transparent. There is no democracy without accountability and transparency. A new landmark documentary film by Swedish TV channel looks at the objectives and motives behind Wikileaks and its founder Julian Assange http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAGTHRV_PJ0 .

  27. “SPECIFICATION 2: In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 19 November 2009 and on or about 5 April 2010, knowingly exceed his authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router network computer and obtain information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive Order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense, to wit: a classified video of a military operation filmed at or near Baghdad, Iraq, on or about 12 July 2007, and did willfully communicate, deliver and transmit the video, or cause the video to be communicated, delivered and transmitted, to a person not entitled to receive it, with reason to believe that such information could be used to the injury of the United States or the advantage of any foreign nation, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1030(a)(1), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.”

    What on earth are they on about???? 1030(a)(1) relates to para Y of Section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, to whit…” y. The term “restricted data” means all data concerning (1) design, manufacture, or utilization of atomic weapons; (2) the production of special nuclear material; or (3) the use of special nuclear material in the production of energy, but shall not include data declassified or removed from the Restricted Data category pursuant to section 142″

    Is there anyone out in the rest of the world who is not aware that the US elects to use DU in their weapon projectiles? Does the US DoD (JAG…) ever turn on CNN, or even read the glossy brochures of their own weapon systems?

    How does film showing the unlawful (and covered up, defaming of the victims) killing of innocent people by an advanced weapon system that the US sells to various other nations constitute a breach of para Y?

  28. Pingback: Tomgram: Chase Madar, The Trials of Bradley Manning, A Defense – Rethink Afghanistan War Blog

  29. Pingback: Why Bradley Manning Is a Patriot, Not a Criminal | Amauta

  30. Pingback: Why Bradley Manning Matters

  31. Pingback: Bradley Manning Is a Hero | Lew Rockwell

  32. This comment is for all military personnel. Thank the heavens that there are many of You that have compassion for your fellow human. That many of You see the real intent of those that fund these wars. Thank you for having the courage to do the right thing, knowing the consequences can/will devastate your lives. How brave?…SO brave that your efforts and actions are felt in the souls of all humanity. I may be one person, but I shall sing your praise and your names to anyone and all that listen…and many many many are listening today!

  33. Pingback: On the court-martial of whistleblower Bradley Manning | Climate Science Watch

  34. Whatever people! You join the military to support and defend your country…SUPPORT! He should have taken off the uniform…a disgrace…deserves whatever comes.
    It shouldn’t matter what he exposed…he broke the law! Point in fact

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *