The filmmaker of “Innocence of Muslims,” the anti-Mohammad video that sparked the recent protests and deaths around the world, has been arrested by federal authorities for allegedly violating the condition for his probation on a 2010 conviction for bank fraud — violations that could land him in jail for three years. Given the calls for his arrest and even execution by Muslim allies, the arrest raises obvious concerns that the Administration is again defending free speech while quietly moving to punish those who cause religious strife.
From my experience as a criminal defense attorney, the violations described in a case of his kind rarely warrant the 4-month term demanded for Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. In addition, the federal authorities insisted on his being jailed as a flight risk, though it is unclear why that is the case and why he could not be given an electronic bracelet.
Magistrate Judge Suzanne H. Segal found that Nakoula exhibited a “lengthy pattern of deception” and posed “some danger to the community.” I can see the basis for the first conclusion but not the evidence of a danger to the community. My concern is that the response to his film — which is a protected act of free speech — was weighed in the balance of such a decision. Nakoula is accused of eight charges of probation violation including making false statements to authorities about the film. He reportedly admitted that he wrote the film but authorities insist that he did not fully explain his role.
The U.S. Attorney suggested that he might charge Nakoula with making false statements about the film — charges that would seem an obvious act of retaliation by the Administration.
The distrust shown by many free speech advocates, including myself, is that the Administration has a checkered history of claiming to support free speech while supporting the creation of an international blasphemy standard. The federal agents quickly moved against the filmmaker after the controversy. Probation rules are written in a way that make it relatively easy to find violations. The immediate scrutiny left many with the impression that the Obama Administration wanted to show Arab allies that the filmmaker was under arrest while professing a commitment to free speech.
Source: LA Times
Blouise, I was at a gas station just now and a woman noticed that I have 5 schools stickers on my car. My car is ten years old and the stickers have a history. She enjoyed it. I love colleges and would like to have been a lifelong student. We have quite a collection of sweatshirts and t- shirts. Some are only from visits. My husband even has a UT law dad burnt orange shirt. Thanks, Malisha.
“The man allegedly behind the anti-Islam YouTube video that sparked deadly riots in North Africa, the Middle East, and other parts of the world now sits in a Los Angeles jail on charges that have little to do with the crude, 14-minute trailer titled “Innocence of Muslims
Instead, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula – the name authorities have settled on for a man known variously as “Sam Bacile,” “Mark Basseley,” and “Mark Basseley Youseff” (which is what he now calls himself), plus a dozen other names – is being held for violating the terms of probation related to a 2010 bank fraud conviction.
Following his conviction, for which he served one year in federal prison, Mr. Nakoula had been ordered not to use an alias or access the Internet without the permission of his probation officer.” Christian Science Monitor
SwM,
Are you wearing your sweatshirt? 😉
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/09/real-life-law-and-order-move-innocence-of-muslims-filmmaker-arrested-for-violating-probation/263017/ This includes a timeline and the terms of his probation which he clearly violated.
Idealist (and anyone), a psychiatrist joke.
For years, in a luxury building in NY where there was an elevator operator (in one of those fancy-cage elevators), two psychiatrists practiced who kept similar hours. Each morning at 8:30 the elevator operator would pick them both up on the ground floor and take them up. At the fourth floor, she would stop for the first one, who would immediately turn, spit into the face of the other psychiatrist, and then get out of the elevator to go to his office. The second psychiatrist, whose office was on the 9th floor, would wipe his face and continue up to his floor.
After ten years the elevator operator was retiring, and on her last day, she carried the two up, and as usual, the one spat at the other one before stepping off. She couldn’t help but ask, as they continued up to the 9th floor: “I’ve taken you up to your office for ten years, and for ten years, that guy spits in your face every day and for ten years, you say nothing about it. Why is that?”
He answered: “Why should I say something? It’s HIS problem!”
PP,
Stop beating your chest. It is embarassing in an old man. I’m not asking you for merits. I told you why I reacted to you, but you ignore that and pull out your bona fides. So what? How shall I measure them. For all I know they might be proof of a pathological need to observe others suffering. And that is logical, since if the LA world is so puky, then there is space for you and them.
You know what. I lived on a hill above Sunset for two years in LA. I staye in LA but found another place to live in Silverlake. In the little time I had to expose myself to the life there, I saw more weirdness than in all the places that I’ve visited since then.
So what does that prove? Napalm ain’t nothing. And Pretty Lady was a fairy tsle. But I did see Liz Taylor dropping off a kid at Grauman’s (?) Chinese one afternoon. So those are my bonafides.
They are not the issue. I gave you some slack and all you do is the “peevish ol’ man who never can lose an argument”-routine in return.
Malisha,
Forgot to mention after one of your “what me worry, what’s to worry about” comments earlier.
Cool! Someone once said: “If someone elses opinions or words disturb you, then the problem is yours, not his.”
Exactly what ridge do that violated his probation…..there are terms and conditions….right…. Make truthful statements…… But what did he do besides make this film…… Nazi Germany understands….. The Russians certainly understand why….the Cuban have a way of making you understand…… Now we imprison for making films…… Wow……
patricparamedic,
You, sir, are a gentleman.
Seriously, the link to the Guardian piece, “Iraqi-American is imprisoned by US for saving his family from US sanctions” was very interesting and informative.
I’m not going to wade back through all the posts to give formal credit but thanks to whomever posted it.
Shanda Lear –
Oops. I stand corrected.
Idealist –
We are all products of our own experiences. My experience is 30+ years on what is indeed the ‘front lines.’
I’ve no need to run off a string of those experiences to prove my points, as I have occasionally done in the past.
“Sweden has no great problem from immigrants.”
Extremely fortunate for Sweden. How do you suspect this character might have been received in your country? I don’t know. I’m asking.
What I have to say next may cause a loud groan from those who have heard it before, and are not at all interested in hearing it again – but it bears repeating:
If one has never spent a 24-hour shift with Paramedic team in a southern California metropolis on a Saturday night, then that person simply lacks the tools in their shed, to construct a fair assessment of what is really going on, with regards to unchecked immigration.
And this ‘filmmaker’ is a perfect example – he should have been deported two decades ago.
Quirky peeves,
Quirky peeves,
Quirky peeves.
Idem, eadem, yawdem.
Ipsa Dipsa doo,
banana fanna fo-fanna.
OK. No big deal.
Wait just one minute … bightest bulb in the chandelier is my copyright for troll work
“Leaving aside what they should have done, it’s quite apparent that what they did do is have the Attorney General or one of his minions direct an operation to raid this guys house (which they did) and find something upon which they could pin an arrest.”
Do you have any evidence that the police “raid” was the result of anything the AG or one of his “minions” did? Why is it so apparent to you when it was local LE that showed up and you’ve already admitted that there’s lots of smoke there to suggest the guy violated his probation? It seems entirely plausible to me (and to a guy with experience in such matters that I trust who is anti-Obama, Ken at Popehat) that looking into whether this guy violated his probation given the public attention to his actions was entirely unextraordinary.
“And, yes, they “miraculously” found something.” Haha, hardly miraculous to find that a guy using an alias to produce a video clip uploaded to the internet violated probation conditions including not using the internet and not using aliases.
anonymously posted,
Please tell me what happened then. The only thing I saw when I looked at the filters was the aforementioned comment quoting Matt Taibbi. Sometimes WP simply eats a comment here and there. If it didn’t involve a filter, then the generic WP burp is your likely suspect.
Patric,
Carlin would have been an invaluable add. 😀 I’m sure he’d have had no problem working around the minimal constraints presented here. The low quality of our recent trolls, however? Would have probably made him catch on fire in a way that would be most entertaining for everyone here but the trolls in question. One of George’s most endearing traits is that he did not suffer fools or idiots gladly.
Gene H.,
Thanks, but I beg to differ with you about having trouble posting. Are we mincing words? 😉
PP,
We are all just quaterbacking through life. Or do you mean you are on the front lines?
You got your views, I got mine. Sweden has no great problem from immigrants. What America does, I don’t know or care. It was your heated words with no facts that got me to react.
IF,
Your smokescreen theory is interesting.
Do you have a source for your timeline of events vis a vis posting and views versus the reference of the film?