Manning ordered to appear before new U.S. grand jury as she is freed from jail

 

FILE PHOTO: Former U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning speaks to reporters outside the U.S. federal courthouse shortly before appearing before a federal judge and being taken into custody as he held her in contempt of court for refusing to testify before a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. March 8, 2019. REUTERS/Ford Fischer/News2Share/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, who was being detained for refusing to testify before a grand jury, was released on Thursday and immediately summoned to appear before a new grand jury next week, her lawyers said.

 

Manning was released after the term expired for the previous grand jury in Virginia that was seeking her testimony in connection with what is believed to be the government’s long-running investigation into WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange.

 

She was simultaneously subpoenaed to appear before a different grand jury on May 16, meaning she could be found in contempt again for refusing to testify and returned to jail, her lawyers said in a statement.

 

Manning had appeared before the grand jury in early March but declined to answer questions.

 

She was jailed for 62 days for contempt of court. A U.S. appeals court denied her request to be released on bail and upheld the lower court's decision to hold her in civil contempt for refusing to testify.

 

"Chelsea will continue to refuse to answer questions, and will use every available legal defence to prove to District Judge (Anthony) Trenga that she has just cause for her refusal to give testimony," the statement said.

 

It is unclear exactly why federal prosecutors want Manning to testify, although her representatives say the questions she was asked concern the release of information she disclosed to the public in 2010 through WikiLeaks.

 

Manning was convicted by court-martial in 2013 of espionage and other offences for furnishing more than 700,000 documents, videos, diplomatic cables and battlefield accounts to WikiLeaks while she was an intelligence analyst in Iraq.

 

Former U.S. President Barack Obama, in his final days in office, commuted the final 28 years of Manning’s 35-year sentence.

 

After nearly seven years of giving Assange refuge in its embassy in London, Ecuador on April 11 ended its protection and he was arrested by British police.

 

The United States is seeking his extradition to face charges of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. Assange plans to fight the U.S. extradition request.

 

WikiLeaks published a classified U.S. military video showing a 2007 attack by Apache helicopters in Baghdad that killed a dozen people, including two Reuters news staff.

 

The U.S. government said Assange tried to help Manning gain access to a government computer. It is not clear if the alleged collaboration between Manning and Assange led to a successful intrusion into any U.S. government computer.

 

(Reporting by David Alexander; editing by Grant McCool)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-05-10

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

how about appearing before a firing squad for treason? 

17 minutes ago, Just1Voice said:

how about appearing before a firing squad for treason? 

 

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

 

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

 

 

After a trial (for the charge of Treason) presumably? One in which she is found Guilty? And where the death penalty has been approved?

 

Or do you just want to shoot anyone you feel like shooting?

 

Doesn't Treason require that a declared war is on-going?

 

Clearly, the administration has their panties in a bunch for Manning.

 

 

 

 

Hey if he goes to jail maybe Julian and manning can be Cellies 

9 hours ago, webfact said:

upheld the lower court's decision to hold her in civil contempt for refusing to testify.

I don't think it's a civil contempt but a criminal contempt.

https://www.bafirm.com/publication/federal-contempt-of-court/

• a contempt sanction should be considered to be civil in nature it if is remedial and intended to benefit the complainant. The court, for instance, explained that a contempt sanction is civil if it is “intended to be remedial by coercing the defendant to do what he had refused to do.” f the relief provided is a fine, it is remedial when it is paid to the complainant, and punitive when it is paid to the court, though a fine that would be payable to the court is also remedial when the defendant can avoid paying the fine simply by performing the affirmative act required by the court’s order.
• the purpose of a criminal contempt sanction (e.g., an unconditional and determinate period of imprisonment or a fixed monetary fine) is to punish the contemnor and vindicate the authority of the court. Consequently, criminal contempt is punitive in character.
• Because of the fine line between coercion and punishment, there is always the possibility that a civil/coercive contempt sanction might evolve into a criminal sanction wherein in cases where a civil contemnor is subjected to continued “coercive” confinement despite the fact that there is “no realistic possibility or no substantial likelihood that additional confinement will coerce.”

If originally it was civil contempt, certainly if Manning continues to refuse the court order it will become criminal contempt.

It should have face the firing squad.

1 hour ago, rgraham said:

It should have face the firing squad.

You are several hours and several decades late with that comment, my friend. 

13 hours ago, Just1Voice said:

how about appearing before a firing squad for treason? 

I was about to answer you, then I saw your signature. I rest my case.

Manning is a traitor as should serve a long term ... this woolly lefty LGBT BS doesn't wash and is not an excuse, traitor is a traitor. 

Good on you gurl.... Just give them hell. All they want is just a bunch of freebees to pin on Julian!!!

 

6 hours ago, rgraham said:

It should have face the firing squad.

You know that 'It' revealed the shooting of a bunch of civilians - many of them children - by a bunch of soldiers who knew full well that they were killing kids, right?

 

The people that covered it up should face the firing squad.

2 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

Manning is a traitor as should serve a long term ... this woolly lefty LGBT BS doesn't wash and is not an excuse, traitor is a traitor. 

 

Just out of curiosity, what sentence would you propose for the helicopter crew that he exposed- killing innocent civilians, and the higher ups in the military and government who covered it up?

 

And while we're at it, would Daniel Ellsberg be out of jail yet if you had your way?  Because history is showing that "traitor" to be a hero, probably saving tens of thousands of US kids, and millions of Vietnamese.

 

I understood that she was willing to testify if the testimony was public but unwilling if it was secret testimony. Not sure if this is accurate.

"It" still looks like an ugly sergeant.