Reply #19: The relevant portion of UCMJ is Article 37: "Unlawfully influencing action of court" [View All]

[struggle4progress]

... No authority convening a general, special, or summary court-martial, nor any other commanding officer, may censure, reprimand, or admonish the court or any member, military judge, or counsel thereof, with respect to the findings or sentence adjudged by the court, or with respect to any other exercise of its or his functions in the conduct of the proceeding. No person subject to this chapter may attempt to coerce or, by any unauthorized means, influence the action of a court-martial or any other military tribunal or any member thereof, in reaching the findings or sentence in any case, or the action of any convening, approving, or reviewing authority with respect to his judicial acts ...
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_10_00000837----000-.html

The relevant portion of the Courts Martial Manual is Rule 104: "Unlawful command influence"
http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/mcm.pdf

Rule 104 largely clarifies UCMJ Article 37. The intent of both 37 and 104 is to shield those involved in courts martial from inappropriate influence, by threat of unfavorable subsequent assignments or evaluations. It is difficult for me to see how a comment from the President, at a private fundraiser, to several supporters of Manning, could be construed as likely to suggest to participants in a court martial, that they would be likely to face reprisal for failing to produce a pre-specified verdict: one presumes that none of Mannings supporters at the fundraiser are likely to serve in any capacity at his court martial, and since all publicity about this comes from Mannings supporters, it is difficult to think that the President's comments reflect any threat, direct or indirect, against anyone who will be involved in the court martial