Live data from Hacker News

Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

courtlistener.com

51–60 of 362 posts

Re: Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

#51
post #30
post #17

I'm wondering if jail is a safer or less safer place in light of the current pandemic. Let's face it, if you got your freedom after so many years only to be handed a facemask on your way out and told - you will need this. Has to suck at some level.

Being confined in an unhealthy space is a very bad place to be right now. This would be a great time to release nonviolent offenders.

Only if they have somewhere to live, so they can isolate themselves if they need or want too. Adding to the homeless would be placing them at greater risk with less medical and people to look out for than any prison.

Homeless people are overlooked at the best of times, at the worst, they can't isolate, they live day by day. We should be focusing in assisting them as by helping them, we also help everybody else as nobody wants to be spreading this and some won't have that choice.

Re: Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

#52

TLDR; the Assange grand jury was dismissed today so Manning is ordered released but she still owes the coeercive fines which amount to $256,000.

That is obscene. I can just about understand contempt of court incarceration for not testifying (though I have extreme reservations on the practice) but such punitive and life-debilitating fines strike me as purely malicious.

I'm sure her representation, who likely are working pro bono, will challenge the fines.

Re: Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

#53
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manning was being squeezed to get at Assange, who most people on HN agree is himself only being squeezed for geopolitical reasons. Nobody is happy to see the justice system abused for geopolitical goals, so any step away from "jail all of the dissenters and all of their supporters" is good to see.

I am baffled that no matter how many times Assange (and a fair number of NY State Fed LEOs) say "It wasn't the Russians", that the "system" nor the "media" nor the "people" seem to be able to take him at face value: It wasn't the Russians. (Even CrowdStrike seems to be backing away from those claims in this last week)

Do you have a link to crowdstrike walking back their statements?

Re: Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"..more than a half million dollars in fines..." https://www.npr.org/2020/03/12/814974205/chelsea-manning-rec... edit: downvoted why? It's an article from today, 1:44pm...

There's been two distinct grand juries, each of which have caused her to be reincarcerated. Maybe she still has fines form the first one?

Even if those have been paid, it's still worthwhile to consider the full scope of injustice inflicted upon her.

Re: Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

#55
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manning was being squeezed to get at Assange, who most people on HN agree is himself only being squeezed for geopolitical reasons. Nobody is happy to see the justice system abused for geopolitical goals, so any step away from "jail all of the dissenters and all of their supporters" is good to see.

I am baffled that no matter how many times Assange (and a fair number of NY State Fed LEOs) say "It wasn't the Russians", that the "system" nor the "media" nor the "people" seem to be able to take him at face value: It wasn't the Russians. (Even CrowdStrike seems to be backing away from those claims in this last week)

Can you link to where Crowdstrike is backing away from this claim?

Re: Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

#56
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I'm not familiar with the facts of the case. And, I further realize that facts are almost completely immaterial to motivated reasoning about the case, but... ... assuming that you (or someone) is a straight-shooter, why is this "fantastic news"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Manning tl;dr she was a whistleblower facing the wrath of the people she outed

A more precise term would be leaker, as somebody who commits a data breach or spillage (military term). Manning did release evidence that appears to constitute a potentially criminal act, however the quantity and material subject of information leaked greatly exceeded any single, or collection of, criminal acts at 750,000 unrelated items.

A whistleblower is a subset of leaking with the limited intention of exposing something specifically nefarious.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_breach

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spillage_of_classified_informa...

Re: Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

#58

If anyone knows of a (legit) way to donate or make a payment towards her $256,000 in fines, please do share the details.

Why would you want to throw away money paying an illegitimate debt? Donate to a trust that will take care of her instead.

Re: Chelsea Manning ordered to be released [pdf]

#60
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is obscene. I can just about understand contempt of court incarceration for not testifying (though I have extreme reservations on the practice) but such punitive and life-debilitating fines strike me as purely malicious.

I'm sure her representation, who likely are working pro bono, will challenge the fines.

I understand they already did (the same order mentions it) and they were denied. Of course, they could appeal I presume.
Post reply on HN