Exemplifying the lack of transparency in the proceedings against Manning:
"The most egregious example of this over the past 1,000 days was the moment in January when the military judge, Colonel Denise Lind, issued her ruling in an Article 13 motion brought by Mannings defence. This was the complaint that the soldier, while at Quantico, had been subjected to a form of pre-trial punishment that is banned under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
* * * * *
"It was an important moment in the narrative arc that is the Bradley Manning trial. Technically, Lind had the power to dismiss all charges against the soldier; she could have, though none of us expected that she would, let him walk out of that court and into freedom. (In the end she knocked 112 days off any eventual sentence).
"So my fellow reporters and I awaited with intense interest Linds judgment, though also with some trepidation. Wed sat through the spectacle of Lind reading out to the court her rulings, and it wasnt a pleasant experience. The judge has a way of reading out her decisions at such a clip that it is almost impossible to take them down even with shorthand or touch typing.
"In the event, Lind spent an hour and a half without pause reading out a judgment that must have stretched to 50 pages, at a rate that rendered accurate reporting of it diabolically difficult. No copy of the ruling has then or now been made available to the public, presumably on grounds of national security, even though every word of the document had been read out to the very public that was now being withheld its publication."