U.S. Army Charges Manning With Leaking Intelligence

FORT MEADE, Md., Feb. 24, 2012 — Army Pfc. Bradley E. Man­ning was arraigned here yes­ter­day on 22 charges that include wrong­ful­ly releas­ing intel­li­gence, theft of records and aid­ing the ene­my.

Man­ning elect­ed to defer his plea and also to defer the forum selec­tion for his court-mar­tial — whether he will be tried by a judge or a pan­el. The court set a ten­ta­tive date of March 15 or 16 for the next ses­sion to hear pre­tri­al motions.

Man­ning was charged with aid­ing the ene­my in vio­la­tion of Arti­cle 104 of the Uni­form Code of Mil­i­tary Jus­tice. He also was charged with 16 spec­i­fi­ca­tions under Arti­cle 134 of the UCMJ: wrong­ful­ly caus­ing intel­li­gence to be pub­lished on the Inter­net know­ing that it is acces­si­ble to the ene­my.

He was charged with five spec­i­fi­ca­tions of theft of pub­lic prop­er­ty or records, in vio­la­tion of 18 U.S. Code 641; eight spec­i­fi­ca­tions of trans­mit­ting defense infor­ma­tion, in vio­la­tion of 18 USC 793(e); two spec­i­fi­ca­tions of fraud and relat­ed activ­i­ty in con­nec­tion with com­put­ers in vio­la­tion of 18 USC 1030(a)(1); and five spec­i­fi­ca­tions under UCMJ Arti­cle 92 for vio­lat­ing Army reg­u­la­tions 25–2, Infor­ma­tion Assur­ance, and 380–5, Depart­ment of the Army Infor­ma­tion Secu­ri­ty Pro­gram.

If con­vict­ed of all charges against him, Man­ning would face a max­i­mum pun­ish­ment of reduc­tion to the low­est enlist­ed pay grade, for­fei­ture of all pay and allowances, con­fine­ment for life and a dis­hon­or­able dis­charge.

Most of the 16 spec­i­fi­ca­tions against Arti­cle 134 relate to Man­ning giv­ing “intel­li­gence to the ene­my, through indi­rect means” while at Con­tin­gency Oper­at­ing Sta­tion Ham­mer, Iraq, between Novem­ber 2009 and May 2010. He is charged with shar­ing ille­gal­ly accessed intel­li­gence with “a per­son not enti­tled to receive it.”

Spec­i­fi­ca­tion 10 of Arti­cle 134 says Man­ning obtained and then divulged five clas­si­fied records relat­ing to a mil­i­tary oper­a­tion in Afghanistan’s Farah province on or about May 4, 2009, with rea­son to believe the infor­ma­tion could be used to the injury of the Unit­ed States or to the advan­tage of any for­eign nation.

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs)