
Court proceedings at Fort Meade in Manning case (Sketch by Clark Stoeckley)
A company commander in Pfc. Bradley Manning’s Army chain of command, who made multiple visits to see Manning while he was imprisoned at Quantico Marine Brig, took the stand as a government witness today to provide testimony on Manning’s treatment. He did not initially appear to have any notion that Manning was mistreated while he was held there, but in the final moments of his testimony he indicated he did not agree with some of the decisions. He also had not been informed of the fact that mental health officers were recommending Manning be taken off prevention of injury (POI) status. And when he finished testifying, he stood up and walked over to shake Manning’s hand.
Cpt. Joseph Casamatta, who was then a company commander at Ft. Myer, said Manning came to his company in July 2010. While Manning was at Quantico, he visited him about ten times and tried to have someone from the chain of command visit him every other week, if possible, to “make sure” he was “being taken care of appropriately.”
When he visited, they would go through a checklist. He would sit in a non-contact booth. Manning would sit in restraints across from him on the other side of a glass window. They would talk ten to twenty minutes.
At first he was not “talkative,” but as weeks went on he opened up more. He was engaged and “always respectful.” He never indicated he would harm himself or try to harm others. He did not think Manning ever appeared withdrawn or reserved.
Cpt. Casamatta said he had a “good rapport” with Manning. They would speak not just about the items on the checklist that had to do with how things were going with his pretrial confinement. He would engage him in conversation about family, the area nearby in Maryland, and they talked a lot about sports (probably March Madness at times).
Manning never complained about the guards and how they were treating him. He said they were “professional,” according to Cpt. Casamatta. Manning also said the facility was treating him professionally as well. (This matches with his testimony on Friday, November 30.)
Cpt. Casamatta said he had asked if the facility “any library system for him.” Was he allowed to read magazines? What would be the process for purchasing those? This was typically what he and other lower-ranking officers in his command that visited Manning could do to ensure he was okay.
He would sometimes escort Manning to appointments. At no point did Cpt. Casamatta observe unusual behavior.
In September 2010, he said he was “confused” about why he was on POI status. Cpt. Casamatta asked Brig personnel why he was on increased status and was told it was to keep him from hurting himself, he told Manning this at the next meeting.
The next time he was told by Manning he was “confused” by his POI status it was in January 2011. Manning said he had submitted a form on January 7 to CWO4 James Averhart, the Brig OIC. He asked about the increased status again, the being placed on suicide risk. First Sergeant Bruce Williams, who also testified today, notified him of the change in status. He was told that there was a board meeting every week to evaluate whether he was being confined at the appropriate level. He wanted to make sure procedures were being followed.
Cpt. Casamatta did not feel like intervening because the Brig had “their standard operating procedure they were going off” and, in his mind, it was not “necessary to intervene in what they were doing.” At no point did Cpt. Casamatta feel Manning’s health or welfare was degrading.
Manning’s defense lawyer cross-examined Cpt. Casamatta on what he knew about a January 18, 2011, incident that has been key to this hearing. Manning had an anxiety attack and passed out, then ran away from officers and hid behind a fitness machine in the Brig’s indoor recreation room. He was placed on suicide risk. But he saw nothing to indicate Manning was a suicide risk. He asked CWO4 Averhart what happened. CWO4 Averhart said there had been an “outburst.”
Cpt. Casamatta was not told that the mental health officer examining Manning did not think suicide risk was warranted. He said he would have “readdressed” the issue had he been told. He would have called the Brig for justification, “not to tell them how to do their job” but to find out what basis they they had to increase his status.
He testified that he did not understand why Manning was placed on increased suicide watch status on March 2, 2011, when CWO2 Denise Barnes chose to begin taking his underwear in the night time. He found out about the comment and drew his own conclusion about what was said – if I really wanted to kill myself, I could use the elastic of my underwear.
Having “the luxury” to assess it as an “outsider,” he did not take this as a threat of suicide. He said he considered it “a tongue-in-cheek comment.” Manning is an “intelligent and articulate person, he said, and,”I believe he just wouldn’t have such thoughts of killing himself with his underwear.” He spoke to Col. Carl Coffman, who served as the Special Court Martial Convening Authority, and told him he did not think his comment warranted him having his underwear removed.
Cpt. Casamatta was never told why Manning was held in maximum custody and on POI for nine months. Also, when Judge Army Col. Denise Lind asked him questions, he told her it was his belief that CWO2 Barnes had placed Manning on the “maximum level of status.” This is not what happened. He had his underwear taken away improperly and CWO2 Barnes did not have the authority. But, Cpt. Casamatta—as evidenced by his testimony—was never made aware of that.
He also did not become aware that the mental health officers were commending he be taken off POI status until the trial started. He thought he should have been made aware of that because then he could have spoken to the mental health professionals to get information that could have made it easier for him to be a part of a “decision-making process.”
What he meant was he could have told the Brig he disagreed with how they were handling Manning’s confinement. But he was never told that anyone was recommending Manning be taken off POI so he never had reason to question the Brig. (He also did not believe the “front page news” stories since he did not think it likely a “company commander” had forced Manning to stand naked at attention, as one news organization reported.)
MSGT. Brian Papakie and then-GYSGT. Craig Blenis both testified they had a conversation about taking Manning off POI status around mid-January. Staff Sgt. Ryan Jordan said this too. But, Cpt. Casamatta had no idea that any of this had taken place among officers at the Brig.
When Cpt. Casamatta finished, he left the witness stand and shook Bradley Manning’s hand. It was further proof that they had developed “good rapport” between one another.
It is clear from his testimony that Cpt. Casamatta may have spoken up for Manning had he been given more information. It is evident that, at times, he did ask for more information on what the Brig was doing and why they were keeping him in certain confinement conditions. He may not have been as aggressive as Manning wanted but it appears Manning respected him for what he did for him while he was imprisoned at Quantico.
*For more from today’s proceedings in Manning’s “unlawful pretrial punishment” hearing, here’s the blog for the day.



13 Comments

When I read that, Kevin, I sort of choked up. Still am.
How do you explain the dynamics that he either was not told a whole picture and/or that he didn’t ask more…..Where is the burden for a fuller explanation here?
There’s that cracker jack US military again. I wonder how many other commander have no idea what their subordinates are doing?
The Brig personnel should have told him the full story.
The judge understands Marines have their chain and the Army has its chain. An Army commander could not reasonably expect to interfere in decisions by Marine Brig officers in charge of the Brig. However, if they caught any whiff of anything that indicated Manning was mistreated, this Army commander would be someone who could help him get transferred out. Or, they could be the ones to press the Brig officers to treat him better.
Casamatta is in the Army. The Brig personnel were in the Marines.
Great reporting, Kevin. It’s amazing to read about much (though not all) of went on behind the scenes with Manning’s abuse at Quantico.
I can’t help, though, but compare this process and the ability for Manning’s attorney’s to question his jailers with what NEVER happens at Guantanamo. Jason Leopold and I published a story earlier today that details some of the terrible things that happened to Adnan Latif, who died mysteriously at Guantanamo last September. Between the forced drugging, the beatings, the attempts to isolate him from his attorneys, and more, the story after many years is just coming out.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/13234-latif-letter-about-guantanamo-speaks-from-the-grave-i-am-being-pushed-toward-death-every-moment
Well, at least Manning is still alive. The government and mainstream press is already coalesced around a suicide via drug overdose narrative. But Leopold and I explain why this is near impossible. I hope readers will follow and support this story. Manning is only getting a hearing because he had popular support. The “nobodies” at Guantanamo are not people Americans readily identify with. That is too bad, because without the precedent of Guantanamo, the abuse of Bradley Manning would not have happened.
I had a similar response; it gave me goosebumps.
Kevin, will that help Manning out with the judge?
Dear Jeff,
I have been involved in support for Brad since the end of 2010. And I have also been closely following your updates on Adnan Latif, whose situation I have found deeply moving.
Can I just explain that one of the main reasons I was particularly ‘hooked’ in to the Bradley Manning campaign, is because, like other people, I immediately felt that somehow it was pivotal for these very issues.
I feel very strongly that the situation with Brad is iconic – and that he is and will continue to be a powerful living testimony to the unthinkable horrors of the wider trashing of the rule of law of this past decade. And that something about him and his case will impact those who, as you say, have no voice.
I feel that it is because of these things that he took (and I believe he did do this) such drastic action – that he felt that nothing short of such a wide ranging across the board act was fitting or able to make any difference or would be respectful enough of all that dreadful suffering. And I believe that this action has set all manner of things moving on many different levels, not least in the fact that he has has had himself to really experience a measure of the inhumanity that he was protesting. And that this is now being exposed in the court room. His own testimony was eloquent and intense, and I think very significant.
David Coombs said, when asked about who Brad is the other night:
I think this is also attested to in the ‘chat logs’ – there’s a shortened version here: http://wiseupaction.info/bradley-manning-in-his-own-words/ – he says he feels ‘connected to everybody…like they were distant family’.
So I don’t think he is really only ‘speaking’ for himself.
I remember at the time that he was being stripped how I was particularly struck by the extraordinary carelessness of the authorities after Coombs had blown the gaffe and the world exploded – THEY STILL CARRIED ON!! Even at the highest level – Obama, Gen Jeh Johnson, were still saying nothing was amiss! And we heard the same tone of amazement that anyone should be bothered yesterday in the letter from Gen Flynn. Like they had all got so used to this shit, that it had become so standard, they wondered what on earth we were all going on about!
I believe that the hubris in this case will count towards more than just Brad’s future.
And I, for one, will be continuing to ‘support the story’ of Adnan Latif – I am writing about him (as I am British, the Shaker Aamer connection is also of great interest to me), and I will continue to follow closely. Thank you for your work.
“And when he finished testifying, he stood up and walked over to shake Manning’s hand.”
I about dropped my computer.
Is this perhaps the first time another person actually touches his hand since he’s been detained?
Is this not monumental?
I could not believe the narrative.
I see from pictures that the guards just touch his clothing, and I even had imagined that he meets with his lawyer
separated by glass? What is his circumstance when he meets with his lawyer?
I am heartened by the humanity of this Army Commander. All the rest that “serve” appear to have lost their souls.
It may not have made it into my blog, but Navy Captain Dr. William Hocter, the psychiatrist who reviewed Manning from July 29, 2010 to mid-January 2011, shook his hand. However, he was a defense witness. It is much more remarkable that someone testifying, who the government called, walked over to shake his hand.
You make a good point. Guantanamo detainees are not allowed to question their jailers. Those suspected of involvement in the 9/11 attacks are not allowed to talk about interrogators that tortured them in their tribunal proceedings.
Thanks, Jeff
Just to be clear, there is no competition between the cases of Bradley Manning and the detainees at Guantanamo. The differences are important, in that Bradley’s case is about defending a whistleblower, is connected to the Assange case, so is also about freedom of the press. The government has come down hard on a number of whistleblowers who have acted out of conscience.
The detainees at Guantanamo, after you subtract a small number of accused hardcore terrorists, had no agenda, except perhaps defense of their homes. Guantanamo IS a war crime.
They are connected through similarities in the kinds of abuse meted out by the government.
I was only commenting on how Bradley is getting, albeit not without struggle and a lot of support, his day in court. There are those held by the US at Gitmo and in Afghanistan who do not get that, and whose stories have not garnered the kind of attention Manning’s has. I think I understand the reasons for that, but sometimes it just needs to be pointed out. It’s not a question of supporting one more than the other. It’s about supporting both, and I should point out that Kevin and FDL has done that over the years.
The brig personnel who administered this travesty redefine the word..SHAMELESS. However, in the world of USG torturing human beings at large, it speaks volumes, as if they do this to their own, think what those sadistic sub-human CIA cockroaches did at the blacksites, and at Club Gitmo. The day Obombardier claimed..”we do not torture” was the day of infamy for me as it proved beyond a shadow of doubt the depth of the vile USG cesspool, and that our Torturer-in-Chief is the most blatant liar on the face of this planet. However, to then see the USG prosecute John Kiriakou all the while allowing that depraved scumbag Jose Jose Rodriguez to escape prosecution for destroying the video evidence of torture and then make millions on a book describing his personal involvement is bona fide proof of how utterly perverse the USG really is. Even the top officials of the 911 Commission were astounded.
But I’m extremely thankful to Kevin for being there to document this, and had it not been for all the supporters pushing back against the leviathan, I have no doubt Manning would not be alive today and would be covered up like so much is and has been. America should be ashamed. But as we all know…’merican exceptunalism is beyond shame and the USG is the moral equivalent of a leech.