xeni at August 21st, 2013 10:06 — #1
ulysses at August 21st, 2013 10:28 — #2
And so the government gets its revenge. Not much in the way of justice here, move along folks.
lion at August 21st, 2013 10:31 — #3
Actually, given that he'd already plea bargained 20 years himself.. I think this is quite the gift. The government was wanting over 60 years. He basically got 15 additional to what he'd plea bargained for offenses that carried 40+ years.
kangorufoo at August 21st, 2013 10:37 — #4
(The BBS asked me to write more.)
prentiz at August 21st, 2013 10:47 — #5
So he's eligible for parole in a little over 10 years? That wouldn't seem particularly unjust, given the options that were available.
amordecosmos at August 21st, 2013 11:05 — #6
So you can THINK the government is evil, corrupt, and breaking the law, you can SAY the government is evil, corrupt, and breaking the law, but if you actually PROVE it, you get 35 years.
lion at August 21st, 2013 11:08 — #7
Especially since his own plea bargain was 20 years no parole. This is a gift. This is an amazingly light sentence compared to what the government wanted.
awjt at August 21st, 2013 11:19 — #8
twirling my finger in the air "CAKE OR DEATH?"
awjt at August 21st, 2013 11:20 — #9
Because in order to show they are breaking the rules, you have to break the rules, and then they like to break the rulebreakers.
boundegar at August 21st, 2013 11:26 — #10
Except the government has used every resource available to label him a traitor. I wonder if prisoners treat traitors better than... say... pedophiles?
seyo at August 21st, 2013 11:27 — #11
I think it's pretty fucking harsh that he only got 112 days of "credit" for the 270 days he was locked up, unlawfully as recognized by the judge, in a box. Why didn't he get the full 270 days for this time, which was clearly "cruel and unusual punishment" and therefore a violation of his constitutional rights?
gtrjnky at August 21st, 2013 11:31 — #12
thaumatechnicia at August 21st, 2013 11:36 — #13
...a 112-day credit for enduring "unlawful pretrial punishment,"?
Gasp! In Canada, for lawful pretrial custody (not even 'punishment'), the standing rule is you get two days for every day in custody.
And, since the judge has decided that the pretrial punishment was unlawful, can we expect charges soon? Or promotions?
nathanhornby at August 21st, 2013 11:40 — #14
Exactly. A judge deemed it unlawful, so when can we expect those involved to face justice?
At least Bradley Manning broke the law for a bloody good reason, his captors were just neandothols.
oktroj at August 21st, 2013 11:44 — #15
I would like to hear what Adrian Lamo has to say about this.
strugglngwriter at August 21st, 2013 11:47 — #16
I'm hoping the next President we elect will give him a pardon. There is no hope that Obama will do this.
marjae at August 21st, 2013 11:54 — #17
Some gibberish about how "facts without the approval and authorized interpretation of MiniTruth are the greatest enemy of truth"?
prentiz at August 21st, 2013 11:54 — #18
Just remember that unlawful or illegal is not the same as criminal. If I break my lease I'm behaving unlawfully, that's not to say my behaviour is criminal. This is not, in any way, a justification of his treatment, btw.
ghostly1 at August 21st, 2013 11:56 — #19
But if you participate in it being evil, corrupt, and it breaking the law, you get a promotion or at least a nice bonus!
nathanhornby at August 21st, 2013 11:57 — #20
I'm not actually aware of the distinction, isn't a criminal just someone that breaks the law?
next page →