Government Admits Brig Commander Improperly Put Bradley Manning on Suicide Watch

Quantico entrance. (photo: crowdive on Flickr)

The government has admitted to MSNBC that the Brig Commander at Quantico improperly put Bradley Manning on suicide watch last week.

The officials told NBC News, however, that a U.S. Marine commander did violate procedure when he placed Manning on “suicide watch” last week.

Military officials said Brig Commander James Averhart did not have the authority to place Manning on suicide watch for two days last week, and that only medical personnel are allowed to make that call.

The official said that after Manning had allegedly failed to follow orders from his Marine guards. Averhart declared Manning a “suicide risk.” Manning was then placed on suicide watch, which meant he was confined to his cell, stripped of most of his clothing and deprived of his reading glasses — anything that Manning could use to harm himself. At the urging of U.S. Army lawyers, Averhart lifted the suicide watch.

So Manning allegedly fails to follow an order and the Brig Commander decides he loses his glasses and is stripped of his clothing?

Remember, Manning has not been convicted of anything yet.

The rest of the article describes that the government has been unable to link Manning to Julian Assange. Maybe that’s why they took his glasses away.

Update: This certainly puts the events from Quantico yesterday in a different light. According to MSNBC, government lawyers realized last week Manning had been improperly treated. By preventing David House from visiting Manning yesterday, they made sure that he wouldn’t have confirmation of that from Manning directly. But since Jane and David’s comments said they’d be back next week, DOD realized they’d need to ‘fess up themselves.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

0 Responses to Government Admits Brig Commander Improperly Put Bradley Manning on Suicide Watch

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @GregoryMcNeal Remember, they only have to be lucky 1% of the time.
43sreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @GregoryMcNeal No more alarmist than the entire premise behind airport security. Or many of our security measures.
59sreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Yes, I know it is 72º here, even though cloudy currently, but I am concerned @michaelwhitney pedicure may have robbed fella of snow traction
17mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @PogoWasRight @EducationNY Absofuckinglutely!! We would do fine together. Just have to find an open F1 bar between our houses.
23mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @joanneleon Oh, I wasn't suggesting he was a she. But boys can be pretty too.
32mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel 3) This makes investigative journalists into agency-free vehicles for leaks in ways press ought to be attentive to https://t.co/fyFyNDOV0S
46mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel 2) Jury should have heard abt improper treatment of classified info other potential culprits had done https://t.co/fyFyNDOV0S
46mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel My thoughts on the Sterling verdicts: 1) Guilty on obstruction will make venue appeal very interesting. https://t.co/vHH6G0B06D (1/3)
47mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @mattapuzzo @yoyabbayo @nytimes Well, yes (though that merits its own much discussed legacy). But, here, the hypocrisy seems relevant w/o ES
55mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz .@mattapuzzo @nytimes Prominent? Important? Yes, but Panetta+Cartwright notable in Sterling article, yes think so relatively before Snowden.
56mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz "Most prominent leak case, however, remains open. Snowden." http://t.co/yD5F5vKPhd Um, @mattapuzzo @nytimes maybe mention Panetta+Cartwright
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @Pedinska: @bmaz @markos @emptywheel 70F and not a cloud in the sky in Denver. :-s
1hreplyretweetfavorite
January 2011
S M T W T F S
« Dec   Feb »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031