The Freedom Bulletin

Yesterday it was announced that Private Bradley Manning, the soldier accused of leaking combat videos and documents to WikiLeaks, will have to face a court martial. He will be tried on 22 charges, including theft of public property or records, transmitting defense information, and aiding the enemy, which could result in life in prison. The decision was announced by Maj. Gen. Michael Linnington after a preliminary hearing in December. The materials that Manning allegedly leaked were what launched WikiLeaks to international fame and controversy: their “Collateral Murder” video, showing soldiers in a helicopter shooting and killing civilians, almost half a million battlefield reports, and a trove of 260,000 secret diplomatic cables. This amounts to the largest leak of classified information in U.S. history. Prosecutors claim that while serving as an intelligence analyst in Iraq, Manning used his security clearance to download this material and collaborated with Assange to release it to WikiLeaks. Manning’s defense lawyer, David Coombs, argued at the hearing that he should not have been given access to the secret materials to begin with, and that their release did little or no actual harm.

The judge and the trial date have yet to be determined.

“This administration owes all Americans an honest explanation for their extraordinary retaliation against Bradley Manning,” said Jeff Paterson of the Bradley Manning Support Network. Nathan Fuller also wrote a great article comparing Manning’s treatment with that of soldiers who have actually killed people. Pretty unjust if you ask me.

Also, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange headed to the British Supreme Court this week in a bid to avoid being extradited to Sweden in his sexual assault case. His lawyer, Dinah Rose, argued that the Swedish prosecutor who issued the European Arrest Warrant was not an impartial, independent judicial authority, and was therefore not qualified to issue the warrant. It would be “contrary to a basic, fundamental principle of law,” she said, for a prosecutor, who would naturally be partial towards extraditing and convicting a defendant, to have responsibility for a decision with such serious implications for personal liberty. Additionally, she questioned whether it was proportionate to extradite Assange, who has offered to be interviewed by videoconference and has not been charged with any crime.

Arguments took place on Wednesday and Thursday before a panel of 7 judges, who will likely wait at least a few weeks before making a decision. Interestingly, this was the first of Assange’s court appearances where cameras were allowed. Videos can be seen here and here. You can also read outlines of the arguments made by the prosecution service and team Assange.

Despite the difficult road he faces, Assange does have a couple of cool things to look forward to. He will be featured on, believe it or not, the Simpsons, where he will be voicing a cartoon version of himself. He recorded his lines remotely from England, where he is living under what is essentially house arrest. The episode will air on February 19.

Additionally, Assange will be recording his very own TV show in which he interviews politicians, thinkers, activists, and revolutionaries from around the world, with a theme of “the world tomorrow.” It will consist of 10 half-hour episodes and will begin in March. It will be airing on RT (Russia Today), and possibly other channels as well. In a WikiLeaks press release, Julian says…

“Through this series I will explore the possibilities for our future in conversations with those who are shaping it. Are we heading towards utopia, or dystopia and how we can set our paths? This is an exciting opportunity to discuss the vision of my guests in a new style of show that examines their philosophies and struggles in a deeper and clearer way than has been done before.”

The idea of seeing Julian on the Simpsons is hilarious, and it will be great to see him as an interviewer and host. Although it can’t be fun living under house arrest and awaiting a decision on whether you will be sent to a foreign jail, I am glad that Assange is still able to voice his ideas in new ways and hopefully make a good amount of money for his legal bills and his organization.

On Wednesday, Christian Karl Gerhartsreiter, AKA Clark Rockefeller, learned that he will face a murder trial for the death of his landlord’s son in California. A preliminary hearing took place over five days last week and the week before in Alhambra Superior Court, CA, during which prosecutors presented their case and successfully convinced a judge that there was enough evidence to send Rockefeller to trial.

The young German immigrant, whose legal name was Christian Gerhartsreiter but who at the time went by Christopher Chichester, lived in a guesthouse owned by an older lady named Didi Sohus in San Marino, CA. Her son, John Sohus, and his wife, Linda Sohus, went missing in 1985. His remains were discovered on the property in 1994, cut up wrapped in plastic bags, and stuffed in a box; hers have yet to be found. Meanwhile, Chichester moved from place to place, taking on new names, creating increasingly elaborate and prestigious background stories for himself, and getting by either on the generosity of others or by doing the best he could at various jobs, given that he possessed few of the qualifications he claimed to have. This life unraveled in 2008, when, known as Clark Rockefeller and living in Boston, he was arrested for kidnapping his 7-year-old daughter, Reigh, after a bitter custody dispute with his ex-wife, Sandra Boss. After being convicted of kidnapping and beginning his sentence in a Massachusetts jail, he was indicted in the old murder case and sent to California.

Confused yet? Here is a recap of what we learned during the preliminary hearing:

Wednesday, January 18: Jose Perez, who was digging a pool at the former Sohus property in 1994, testified that his father uncovered a bag of bones, which he initially thought was the remains of a dog. Judith Day of the coroner’s office described how the bones, still clothed, were all separately wrapped in plastic. And Medical examiner Dr. Frank Sheridan said that Sohus’s death was caused by fractures on the right and front sides of the head, made by three blows with a rounded object such as a baseball bat.

Thursday, January 19: San Marino patrolman Thomas LeVeque testified that Didi Sohus believed her son and daughter-in-law were in Paris on a top-secret mission and would not tell investigators anything more, saying that doing so could put them in danger. As time went on and Chichester mysteriously moved away, Didi became more worried and even began drinking, according to her friend, Marianne Kent. She received a postcard that was supposed to be from Linda in Paris, but Lili Hasdell, another former police officer, testified that the handwriting did not match. And Judge William Stewart, who was an attorney and friend of Chichester, testified that he lent him a chainsaw. However, defense lawyers raised the possibility of another suspect, a real estate agent who helped Didi Sohus to sell her house and also did grocery shopping for her, drove her around, and spent a lot of time with her.

Friday, January 20: According to forensic scientist Lynne Herold, four bloodstains were found on the floor of the guesthouse where Chichester lived. The blood showed “wiping patterns,” but it was impossible to determine, with the technology available at the time, whose it was. Additionally, a t-shirt found with John Sohus’s remains had cuts that appeared to have been made by a sharp object.

Monday, January 23: John’s friend, Patrick Rayermann, testified that during a conversation shortly before his disappearance, John spoke of tensions with his mother, and feeling torn between staying with her and moving out with Linda. He also described John as “faultlessly reliable and said that neither he or Linda spoke of any definite plans to go off on their own. Lydia Marano, the owner of the bookstore where Linda worked, said that their relationship “made the rest of us smile” and called her “the most trustworthy person I had working for me.” Harry Sherwood, Didi Sohus’s grandson, said that he found John and Linda’s belongings strewn about, not consistent with a couple who were making a planned, long-term move. An acquaintance, Robert Brown, said that Gerhartsreiter asked him where to dispose of drums of toxic chemicals, saying he used them for his job at USC film school. And other witnesses said that he tried to sell them an oriental rug with a bloodstain on it.

Tuesday, January 24: Mihoko Manabe, who was Rockefeller’s girlfriend for 7 years in New York, when he went by the name Christopher Crowe, testified that he became paranoid after a detective called in 1988, looking for him. He grew a beard, had her die his hair, insisted on not walking with her in public, and planned to leave the country with her, telling her to stop communicating with friends and family and to receive mail at P.O. boxes.  He began to use the name Clark Rockefeller after discovering how respectfully he was treated when he used it. After he lost his job as a bond salesman due to his fake identity being discovered, Manabe supported him and got him a credit card under his new name. She described him as someone with “a temper, but not in a physically violent way…He could be very mean.” On the same day, his next-door neighbor in San Marino, Mary Cologne, said that she saw black smoke coming from his chimney one day, which smelled “terrible.” He said he was burning carpet.

The Boston Globe also has an interesting account of Rockefeller’s interview with the FBI after he was arrested in the kidnapping case.

With Sohus’s death taking place so long ago, some witnesses seem to have fuzzy memories, and it is doubtful there will be a lot of forensic evidence in this case. It will be interesting to see whether the circumstantial evidence, which was determined to be enough to establish probable cause, will be enough to convince a jury of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Supreme Court made a great ruling yesterday, unanimously declaring that, absent a warrant or probable cause, it is unconstitutional for police to track people’s movements by attaching a GPS device to their car.

As Justice Sotomayor points out:

“GPS monitoring generates a precise, comprehensive record of a person’s public movements that reflects a wealth of detail about her familiar, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations … The Government can store such records and efficiently mine them for information years into the future … And because GPS monitoring is cheap in comparison to conventional surveillance techniques and, by design, proceeds surreptitiously, it evades the ordinary checks that constrain abusive law enforcement practices: ‘limited police resources and community hostility.’ “

Read the full text of the ruling, in the case of United States v. Antoine Jones, here.

Former Penn State football coach Joe Paterno passed away today of lung cancer, just two months after his reputation was irreparably tarnished by his alleged failure to respond forcefully enough to allegations of child abuse. It is, first of all, very sad that such a successful and celebrated coach had to spend the last months of his life not only fighting a painful disease but also knowing that his standing would be forever diminished in the eyes of many people. Second of all, Paterno is another example of our society’s tendency to punish people who are merely accused of wrongdoing, not found guilty. As Judge H. Lee Sarokin pointed out, Paterno was fired before the facts of the case could be determined, similarly to how Dominique Strauss-Kahn was pressured into resigning from the IMF after being accused of sexual assault, and how Herman Cain ended up quitting his presidential campaign after allegations of sexual harassment and an affair. Although Paterno faced no charges and spent no time in jail, for his career to end so abruptly and on such a bad note is undoubtedly a punishment. Yes, sexual abuse is a crime that should be punished severely, but considering the fact that Paterno is not accused of abusing anyone, that he actually reported the abuse allegations to his immediate supervisor, and that his only arguable mistake was not reporting the allegations personally to police, I think it is sad that his career and life ended the way that they did.

In September of last year, Ryan Jerome, a jeweler from Indiana, traveled to New York with $15,000 of gold that he planned to sell to a refinery on Long Island. He checked a website about gun laws to make sure it was okay to bring his gun, for which he had a concealed carry permit. He interpreted the site as saying it was okay, so he took along the .45 caliber Ruger to protect himself and his gold. He and his girlfriend stayed in New York longer than they planned in order to ride out a dip in gold prices. One day they visited the Empire State Building to pass the time, where he asked a ticket seller what he should do with his gun and was directed to the security office to check the weapon. When he did that, however, security called the police, who charged him with illegal weapon possession and threw him in jail for two days before he was released on bail. He now faces 3 and 1/2 to 15 years in prison. The problem? Jerome’s Indiana concealed carry permit was not valid in New York.

To punish a person who did not hurt or even endanger anyone, who took precautions to make sure he wasn’t breaking the law, and is a Marines veteran to boot, is clearly unjust. As his lawyer said, ”Ryan Jerome is neither a criminal nor someone with an illegal gun.”

Jerome’s supporters are trying to get Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance (whom you may remember from the DSK case)  to dismiss the charges. Visit their Facebook page to learn more and support him.