Bradley Manning trial: Judge refuses to drop 'aiding the enemy' charge She said those factors supported the government case that Manning "knowingly provided information to the enemy." She noted that Manning would have been aware of the use of the internet by terrorist organisations and was trained in the need to protect classified information. Col Lind also refused to dismiss a computer fraud count. Manning, whose mother is Welsh and who went to secondary school in Haverfordwest, has already pleaded guilty to reduced versions of some charges which could carry a sentence of up to 20 years in prison. She can yet acquit him of "aiding the enemy" when she delivers her final verdict. The broad-ranging "aiding the enemy" charge has caused particular alarm for advocates of press freedom and whistle-blowers as the case could set a precedent for bringing the same information against any leaker of national defence material that appears online. The prosecution has stated that it would be pressing the same charges had Manning leaked to traditional media outlets such as The New York Times or Washington Post. "The point of charging Manning in this way is to transform what was widely seen around the world as a valuable leak into treason," said Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. The government purports to criminalise any information that is published somewhere where the enemy can see it. David Coombs, Manning's civilian lawyer, argued that in a series of online exchange before he was identified as the leaker, his client did not express any intent to aid "any potential enemy." Instead, he said those conversations made clear that Manning's motivation was to increase public awareness "in order to spark change and reform." His client was guilty of negligence, but not "evil intent," he argued. Military prosecutors insisted that as an intelligence analyst, rather than an infantryman or driver, Manning was well aware that terrorists make extensive use of the internet. "He knew exactly what he was doing," military prosecutor Capt. Angel Overgaard said in a hearing earlier this week. He knew exactly the consequences of his actions. The "aiding the enemy" charge has become the pivotal battle in the case as Barack Obama's administration makes clear its determination to pursue leakers of confidential material. Testifying for the defence, Harvard law professor Yochai Benkler said that the prosecution case would mean "that any leak to a media organisation that can be read by any enemy anywhere in the world becomes automatically aiding the enemy."