There are huge legal doubts. The first thing to consider is whether a person kept in the conditions that Manning was is able to properly defend themselves.
If I was a member of the jury I could not in good conscience return a guilty verdict to any organization the holds it's prisoners in the conditions that the US Military holds their prisoners.
The 5th amendment is very important and Manning's decision to use it is not an indicator of his guilt. Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and it must be for laws that are just. A plaintext log from a convicted felon does not push the bar over that threshold in my opinion.
When the commanding officer of ever jury member has instructed them that he is guilty it would raise doubts in my mind as to whether the laws that allow a trial to take place after such instruction are just. Also, the fact that you need to give up many of your rights in order to be eligible for treatment under the UCMJ raises many issues. The economic pressures and well as indoctrinal issues due to mandatory schooling and the content of that schooling raise questions as to whether Manning was of sound mind and free from duress when signing the UCMJ.
It's important to note that in the mandatory school system a class on critical thinking is not required, unlike some non-mandatory systems like IB where critical thinking is a required component.
> If I was a member of the jury I could not in good conscience return a guilty verdict to any organization the holds it's prisoners in the conditions that the US Military holds their prisoners.
What I am interested is how people like you get on the jury without being filtered out. You are certainly not someone the prosecution would want on. Are juries selected for authoritarianism and blind conformity, could you fake it through the selection process?
If I was a member of the jury I could not in good conscience return a guilty verdict to any organization the holds it's prisoners in the conditions that the US Military holds their prisoners.
The 5th amendment is very important and Manning's decision to use it is not an indicator of his guilt. Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and it must be for laws that are just. A plaintext log from a convicted felon does not push the bar over that threshold in my opinion.
When the commanding officer of ever jury member has instructed them that he is guilty it would raise doubts in my mind as to whether the laws that allow a trial to take place after such instruction are just. Also, the fact that you need to give up many of your rights in order to be eligible for treatment under the UCMJ raises many issues. The economic pressures and well as indoctrinal issues due to mandatory schooling and the content of that schooling raise questions as to whether Manning was of sound mind and free from duress when signing the UCMJ.
It's important to note that in the mandatory school system a class on critical thinking is not required, unlike some non-mandatory systems like IB where critical thinking is a required component.