Defense opens case in Manning's WikiLeaks trial
by David Dishneau, Associated Press and Pauline Jelinek, Associated Press
July 08, 2013 12:30 PM | 388 views | 0 0 comments | 13 13 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Army Pfc. Bradley Manning arrives at the courthouse in Fort Meade, Md., Monday, July 8, 2013, after the start of the sixth week of his court martial. Manning is charged with indirectly aiding the enemy by sending troves of classified material to WikiLeaks. He faces up to life in prison. ( AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
Army Pfc. Bradley Manning arrives at the courthouse in Fort Meade, Md., Monday, July 8, 2013, after the start of the sixth week of his court martial. Manning is charged with indirectly aiding the enemy by sending troves of classified material to WikiLeaks. He faces up to life in prison. ( AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
slideshow
FORT MEADE, Md. (AP) — Lawyers for an Army private who gave classified information to WikiLeaks opened their defense at his court-martial Monday with leaked video of a U.S. helicopter attack in Baghdad.

Pfc. Bradley Manning has admitted to leaking the 39-minute cockpit video showing a 2007 attack that killed a Reuters news photographer and his driver. The Pentagon concluded that the troops reasonably mistook the journalists for enemy combatants. The video is the basis of an espionage charge alleging that Manning had unauthorized possession of national defense information. The government contends that Manning wasn't authorized to possess the video.

WikiLeaks posted it in April 2010 under the title "Collateral Murder."

The defense called its first witness, Chief Warrant Officer 2 Joshua Ehresman, to establish the wide authorized access Manning and other intelligence analysts had. Ehresman testified that Manning and others he worked with in Iraq compiled reports based on a broad spectrum of information available on a classified computer network.

"We got them wherever we could," Ehresman said.

Earlier Monday, as the trial entered its sixth week, Manning's defense team asked the military judge to acquit him of as many as seven charges for lack of incriminating evidence. The government has until Thursday to respond, then Col. Denise Lind will rule.

The defense seeks acquittal on the most serious charge of aiding the enemy, a computer fraud charge and as many as five counts of theft. Details of the motions weren't discussed in court.

Manning faces 21 contested counts. The former intelligence analyst pleaded guilty in February to reduced versions of some charges. He faces up to 20 years for the admitted offenses.

The defense has said it intends to call 25 witnesses to refute the government's charges. The 10 prospective witnesses on Monday include Harvard law professor Yochai Benkler, who has written that leaking something to WikiLeaks is no different than leaking it to The New York Times. Benkler's testimony could refute the government's assertion that Manning knowingly gave intelligence to the enemy because he knew al-Qaida members would see what WikiLeaks posted on its website.

Another prospective defense witness, retired Air Force Col. Morris Davis, would likely give testimony to refute charges stemming from Manning's acknowledged leak of Guantanamo Bay detainee assessment records. Morris was the chief prosecutor at Guantanamo from 2005-07.

Manning said in a Feb. 28 courtroom statement that the assessment briefs were "not very important from either an intelligence or national security standpoint."

Michael Navarre, a former Navy judge advocate now in private practice in Washington, said lead defense attorney David Coombs will likely seek to elaborate on Manning's assertion in his February statement that he selectively leaked material that wouldn't harm national security.

"I think he would pick up on the themes he brought out in the plea," Navarre said.



Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides