Bradley Manning sentenced to 35 years for Wikileaks disclosures

Bradley Manning sentenced to 35 years for Wikileaks disclosures

Summary: The soldier, convicted of leaking classified documents to whistleblowing group Wikileaks, was sentenced to 35 years of jail time by a military judge.

TOPICS: Security

Pfc. Bradley Manning, convicted of leaking hundreds of thousands of documents to whistleblowing group Wikileaks in 2010, was sentenced on Wednesday by a military judge to serve 35 years in prison.

Last month, Manning was convicted of multiple charges, including violations under the Espionage Act. He was found guilty on nearly all charges, including copying and transmitting classified information while serving as an intelligence analyst in Iraq, but not guilty on aiding the enemy.

The documents made up Wikileaks' Iraq and Afghanistan "War Logs," which included thousands of cables sent between U.S. embassies abroad and the U.S. State Department in Washington D.C.

He also leaked a video showing a U.S. Apache helicopter firing on a group of Iraqis, which the crew believed to be insurgents, but included two journalists.

Manning faced up to 90 years in prison, but the U.S. government asked for 60 years, saying it would "send a message to any soldier contemplating stealing classified information," according to military prosecutor Capt. Joe Morrow.

Manning was given a credit for about three and a half years for the time he has already spent behind bars, including 112 days of credit for "abusive treatment" he was subjected to in Quantico.

He must serve at least one-third of his sentence before he is eligible for parole, reports The Guardian

Topic: Security

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • o tempora o mores

    >>"it would send a message to any soldier contemplating stealing classified information,"
    Hey, thanks for not considering another convincing message, such as, dismembering him while broadcasting on all TV and cable channels. It's utterly humane also not to prosecute his relatives (and friends). That would be even a more persuasive message to send (you see you still have something to learn from NKVD and the great generalissimo Joseph Stalin here)

    Without irony the conclusion here for US soldiers is the following: you can kill civilians as much as you like (you may pretend they look insurgents to you later), imagine yourself playing video games, just make sure you have no witnesses. You can even get an award for downing an entire civilian aircraft just like the captain of the USS Vincennes did to the Iranian A300 full of passengers. Should you dare to resort to your bloody conscience and tell on your comrades perpetrating the above to the world, you become enemy of the state. Telling how morally corrupt the US diplomatic service is, you automatically multiply your term by two, three or an arbitrary natural number greater than one.
    • He shold have....

      gotten a heck of a lot more time than he did. Distributing classified information can get people killed or provide aid to the enemy. I don't care what his excuse was. There are proper channels (chain of command) for bringing stuff like that out. What he did was nothing short of spying.
      Test Subject
      • And that's exactly why people like you are so dangerous

        Because ignorance sometimes can actually cost you and everyone's freedom.

        Manning did not "distributing" anything. He sent those information to WikiLeak, which partnered with well known news organizations (The Guardian, The New York Times) etc, for editorial and release with redaction. WikiLeak in a way operates just like any news wire today.

        It's no different than the way how the "Pentagon Papers" was being leaked by Daniel Ellsberg. If you think manning is a traitor, you need to go study some U.S. history.
        • Ignorance like yours is a lot more damaging to a country...

          In fact, ignorance is not your problem. Being dumb is.

          Handing over documents to any entity outside of the military, which is "who" Manning was working for, is tantamount to going to a distribution channel to get the "secrets" out.

          Wikileaks does not have "leaks" in its name because they like to urinate in public places. Leaks is what the name implies when it comes to disclosing information which is supposed to be trusted to individuals with "secret" clearances.

          Wikileaks, just like any other such organization, is in the business of disclosing information which they believe should not be secret or guarded. So, Wikileaks did what they were expected to do by Manning, which is to distribute the information to bigger and better known distributors of information, such as the NY Times the The Guardian. So, let's not mince words; Manning did intend to lead the information which could then be widely distributed via other channels.
  • Hell, people sell the whole government to business mafias

    who then install their own men to run the show and enact their own laws. The integrity of the US government and its armed forces is not worth a dead fish. Hopefully, nine minutes after Brad gets the Nobel Prize he'll be released and offered $10 mill in compensation. Semper Fi.
  • A sad day for America

    It is a sad day in America: the Statue of Liberty on Staten Island has a tear in her eye.
    Not only is it a tragic day for Pfc. Bradley Manning, who was sentenced this morning to spend 35 years of his young life in prison, but it is also gloomy for everyone who believes in the free flow of information about what our government is doing FOR us and TO us.
    We detailed our objections at In the (K)now blog in: “Manning Sentence: A sad day for America and press freedom:”
    Prosecutors made it clear that their intention was not only to punish Pfc. Bradley Manning (which they have accomplished) but also to discourage others from leaking information.
    Let us hope they fail.
    We would be less well off as a nation if the press is no longer able to expose government wrongdoing at every level, and to do so, it needs courageous, honest people on the inside willing to risk it all in the name of patriotism.
    Thank you, Bradley Manning.
    In the (K)now blog
  • Should have been guilty of aiding the enemy

    He released info that could have and probably did get allies killed.
  • Bla Bla Bla

    The guy knowingly violated every code of conduct, pledge and oath that he was required to swear prior to being allowed access to that info in the first place.
    Despite what noble causes some people or organizations have tried to bestow upon him, the bottom line is he divulged that information for his own selfish personal gain and is a traitor to his country.
  • Boggled

    I am boggled by the number of people who appear to be totally happy that their government will cover up misdeeds, often criminal offenses in themselves, deny justice to people wronged, in order to further (or protect) their own careers and bank accounts.

    In a democracy, I am amazed that there appear to be many people who effectively condone this corruption and even support it (are they as bad, then?).

    The article plainly says that Pfc Manning did NOT aid the enemy. In which case of course the only 'victims' of his 'crime', are the corrupt. The constitution has been betrayed.