‘Innocence of Muslims’ filmmaker sentenced to a year in prison for ‘parole violation’

posted at 1:31 pm on November 8, 2012 by Mary Katharine Ham

Ed touched on this earlier, but I wanted to tease it out a little.

One reason to look forward to a Republican president would have been that people might start finding stuff like this outrageous again:

The California man behind an anti-Muslim film that roiled the Islamic world was sentenced Wednesday to a year in prison for violating his probation stemming from a 2010 bank fraud conviction by lying about his identity.

U.S. District Court Judge Christina Snyder immediately sentenced Mark Basseley Youssef after he admitted to four of the eight alleged violations, including obtaining a fraudulent California driver’s license. Prosecutors agreed to drop the other four allegations under an agreement with Youssef’s attorneys, which also included more probation.

All the news accounts about Mark Basseley Youssef/Nakoula Basseley Nakoula’s arrest and sentencing assure us that the charges are “unrelated” or “had nothing to do with” the content of the YouTube film, “Innocence of Muslims.”

Never mind there was a national media manhunt for the man behind the movie, federal officers taking him in for questioning, a concerted effort by national officials to blame violence on the making of the video, a taxpayer-funded apology to the people of Pakistan for one of our citizens’ creative endeavors, and an alleged promise from the Secretary of State to make sure the maker of the film was “prosecuted.”

Prosecutors, who should have kept their noses and the First Amendment clean by sticking strictly with Youssef’s alleged probation violations, nonetheless brought up the film in court.

Dugdale said authorities have not been able to establish definitively who posted it online. (This was the original justification for the probation violation arrest. —Ed.) The film portrays Muhammad as a religious fraud, womanizer and pedophile.

He argued Youssef’s lies about his identity have caused harm to others, including the film’s cast and crew. Deadly violence related to the film broke out on Sept. 11 and spread to many parts of the Middle East.

“They had no idea he was a recently released felon,” Dugdale said Wednesday. “Had they known that, they might have had second thoughts” about being part of the film.

Youssef’s defense lawyer concludes:

Defense lawyer Steven Seiden told reporters after Wednesday’s hearing that the government was using its probation case to punish Youssef for making the film, thus chilling his client’s constitutional rights to freedom of expression.

“This hearing had everything to do with the movie,” he said.

I guess he’s lucky he didn’t get two years for his probation violation offensive speech:

Federal authorities initially sought a two-year sentence for Youssef but settled on a one-year term after negotiating a deal with Youssef’s attorneys. Prosecutors said they wouldn’t pursue new charges against Yousseff – namely making false statements – and would drop the remaining four probation-violation allegations leveled against him. But Youssef was placed on four years’ probation and must be truthful about his identity and his future finances.

Seiden asked that his client be placed under home confinement, but Snyder denied that request. Youssef will spend his time behind bars at a Southern California prison.

For a federal government not interested in punishing anyone for creating a film, they sure have a lot of “authorities” dedicated to sussing out the details of its making and dissemination:

Federal authorities have said they believe Youssef is responsible for the film, but they haven’t said whether he was the person who posted it online.

Youssef’s lawyer says he wrote the script and may have served as a “cultural consultant,” but didn’t upload the video, which was the original justification for his arrest. It sounds like getting a fake California driver’s license is a violation probably worth punishing a convicted fraud for, but he was apprehended by federal authorities with probation violation as mere fig leaf. Throwing him in jail does far more harm to free speech than it does to spare society from Youssef’s potential next deception. Judges have discretion for a reason. I make no claim to legal expertise, but can’t the actors involved seek some kind of civil solution in the courts instead of criminal, if indeed they were harmed? Update: They already are.

At the time of his arrest in September, attorneys who know this type of law suspected probation officials were getting all sorts of guidance from highly placed federal officials because of the “international complexity” of the case:

“This case breaks the mold,” said Mark Werksman, a defense attorney in Los Angeles and a former federal prosecutor. “If the video hadn’t gone viral, and caused the Arabic world to blow up, who would care if this guy is using YouTube? It’s all about politics with this guy.”

Lawyers also noted at the time that suspected probation violations are generally handled by probation officers, who submit a confidential report to a judge, who can then determine what punishment if any is warranted. This case was handled…differently:

“Usually the probation officer will be most interested in preventing him from engaging in any kind of activity related to the original crime, so another factor would be what kind of permission did the probation officer give him?” she said. “Why would (the film) be of concern in a bank fraud case? That’s a whole nother wrinkle.”

Youssef’s parting words:

“The one thing he wanted me to tell all of you is President Obama may have gotten Osama bin Laden, but he didn’t kill the ideology,” Seiden said.

Asked what that meant, Seiden said, “I didn’t ask him, and I don’t know.”

Good thing. The answer could be a “parole violation.”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The man of the mind is going on strike.

tom daschle concerned on November 8, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Absolutely crazy stuff. You are seriously trying to refashion a convicted fraudster who violated his parole into some kind of hero artiste? Sorry, there is no conspiracy.
bifidis on November 8, 2012 at 2:01 PM

At the same time, the guy is a criminal scumbag with a long list of felony convictions including meth manufacturing, bank fraud, and identity theft, and has been in jail before for probation violations. Seems he’s a guy who got legitimately busted, but for the wrong motivations.

AngusMc on November 8, 2012 at 2:04 PM

and yet, check the timelines between the first accusations against the unsavory filmmaker, and his getting busted.

The WH, via the FBI, CIA, etc have access to real time criminal info. Film boy was played a long time before they decided to close out the tale and bust him, while supposedly he had in his hands the ability to create WWIII and had already caused the deaths of our people.

When people found out about the film, they created insta-riots. That says film boy was an unknown until the WH promoted him.

If I was staging a cover, and looking for a dupe, it isn’t odd to get someone you can bust when you are ready. However, if you sre staging a world wide dupe in the internet age, you are asking for trouble by fingering even a petty criminal unless you are very very sure about how he will act when busted, because unless you have someone go into the police station and shoot him, he would have the rest of his life to talk. He hasn’t talked a lot has he.

That to me is the real conspiracy theory, whether film boy was shocked to be fingered by the WH, or waiting for his cues

entagor on November 8, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Wow! He got a whole year? Just think of what John Corzine is gonna get for stealing a billion plus. Oh, yeah, nevermind.

scgas on November 8, 2012 at 2:56 PM

And yet, here your dumb ass is, talking sh** and confusing freedom of speech with entitlement to someone else’s privately paid-for forum.

M240H on November 8, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Actually, no one’s confused about that, dipstick. It’s probably a good thing that Salem Communications has saved a little private corner of the internet for you all after getting your asses kicked at the voting booth.

You need somewhere to indulge yourselves until you get to your gestalt moment.

bifidis on November 8, 2012 at 2:57 PM

bifidis on November 8, 2012 at 2:57 PM

The godless reprobate goes to german psychology to demean his opponent.

When do you NAZI’s get around to the final solution?

tom daschle concerned on November 8, 2012 at 3:03 PM

bifidis on November 8, 2012 at 2:57 PM

I like commenters like you. You provide motivation.

Back to your leftist hypocrisy. HuffPo still requires registration. Nice little corner echo chamber there, hypocrite. There is no open, off the street commenting. And it’s heavily censored. So your points worthless and just plain wrong.

Back to the point of the thread. It’s was a show trial. How many other people get moved to the front of the docket like him?

How long since his arrest?

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Sent from my Obamaphone
bifidis

Bevan on November 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM

M240H on November 8, 2012 at 2:10 PM

.
Actually, no one’s confused about that, dipstick. It’s probably a good thing that Salem Communications has saved a little private corner of the internet for you all after getting your asses kicked at the voting booth.

You need somewhere to indulge yourselves until you get to your gestalt moment.

bifidis on November 8, 2012 at 2:57 PM

.
Sore losers are annoying, but sore winners ?

listens2glenn on November 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM

‘Bleep’ allah, ‘bleep’ mohamad. ‘bleep’ islam and damn sure ‘bleep’ muzzies.

soghornetgunner on November 8, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Move to conservative states. Make them true firewalls.

JellyToast on November 8, 2012 at 3:09 PM

kim roy on November 8, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Looking at the typos of mine in this thread, I really need to go too. :-)

But the point wasn’t just me or nitzsche, what do “you” qualify for. Look into getting a subsidy for a green purchase. I’m thinking about relooking alternative energy for my house. I was to the point where I couldn’t really see shelling out the bucks for PV cells or Solar Heat panels and I didn’t want to burden the tax system with the incentives. (Up to 35 percent of a close to 38K install) Now I say, what sane person wouldn’t?

What do you qualify for? Research. Take. It’s there for the asking.

Break it.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:11 PM

What do you qualify for? Research. Take. It’s there for the asking.
Break it.
hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Got to admit, if you don’t take it, someone else will, until they run out of ink

entagor on November 8, 2012 at 3:14 PM

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:11 PM
Got to admit, if you don’t take it, someone else will, until they run out of ink

entagor on November 8, 2012 at 3:14 PM

I think it needs to be broke before it can be fixed.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Sore losers are annoying, but sore winners ?

listens2glenn on November 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM

White liberals are sore winners because deep down they will never feel that they are winners since most whites vote Republican and hence the white liberals deep down will always feel that they are a losing minority… Do you really think that the white liberals want to be with blacks and hispanics? Of course not, they want them to be as far away as possible from their neighborhoods and places of gathering… The irony is that it is an impossibility for liberals to win a single national elections if not for blacks and to a lesser degree the hispanics but first and foremost they can only win national elections because 95% of blacks vote democrats but the white liberals would never want blacks to be living among…

mnjg on November 8, 2012 at 3:19 PM

I don’t think he is in prison. I don’t think he is real, I think he is just play acting and has entered the Witness Protection plan.

Fleuries on November 8, 2012 at 3:22 PM

Aside, this movement of ours — and there’s a movement afoot, the air is buzzing a little, and I recognize that weird, growling sound — this movement of ours is going to have some really strange icons.

We won’t be shouting Free P**** Riot! much, but we’re going to be shouting some really weird things. Strange bedfellows, that kind of thing.

The future’s gone all “resistance” on us. It bears no resemblance to my previous daydreams.

Axe on November 8, 2012 at 3:24 PM

If anyone wonders whether this country is becoming a leftist police state, this should answer their question.

bw222 on November 8, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Muhammad (((:~{>
Muhammad with sand in his eye (((;~{>
Muhammad with a bomb in his turban. *@(((:~{>>
Muhammad getting teabagged 3(((:~{>
Muhammad under attack by the starship Enterprise =-o * * * (((:~{>

Are they coming for me yet or shall I keep going?

Alberta_Patriot on November 8, 2012 at 1:57 PM

I rewatched the Ezra Levant in the star chamber videos last night. He was hauled in before a nameless faceless beuarocrat in a non-descript meeting room to defend his intentions when he printed a mohamet cartoon. Really interesting.

tom daschle concerned on November 8, 2012 at 2:08 PM

I lived a couple blocks away from Levant when he was a law student at the UofA. I met him a couple times at Reform party functions. If they come for me, it won’t be too hard to get a hold of him. He’d probably love another round with the Royal Canadian Mounted Thought Police.

Alberta_Patriot on November 8, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Funny that none of the Hollywood bigs seem interested in making movies about big mo. I guess they don’t like controversy.

slickwillie2001 on November 8, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Looking at the typos of mine in this thread, I really need to go too. :-)

But the point wasn’t just me or nitzsche, what do “you” qualify for. Look into getting a subsidy for a green purchase. I’m thinking about relooking alternative energy for my house. I was to the point where I couldn’t really see shelling out the bucks for PV cells or Solar Heat panels and I didn’t want to burden the tax system with the incentives. (Up to 35 percent of a close to 38K install) Now I say, what sane person wouldn’t?

What do you qualify for? Research. Take. It’s there for the asking.

Break it.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:11 PM
Natural gas is the best source of enery. The Law of Conservation of Energy is that it is neither created nor destroyed. Natural methane is in our bodies and your grandfathers will heat your house.

kenny on November 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Funny that none of the Hollywood bigs seem interested in making movies about big mo. I guess they don’t like controversy.

slickwillie2001 on November 8, 2012 at 3:27 PM

He’s not controversial. I’ll send you an updated list of the controversial things. — And a couple of the new patriot posters, too, for your hall and living room, to be sure you are still compliant and qualify for your dwelling insurance subsidy.

Axe on November 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

kenny on November 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Can’t get NG in my area. My emergency generator will have to run on LP. Speaking of the generator, checking to see if it qualifies me for another tax break or deduction.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Can’t get NG in my area. My emergency generator will have to run on LP. Speaking of the generator, checking to see if it qualifies me for another tax break or deduction.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:33 PM

No offense intended. I know that the anti-energy liberals are hurting a lot of people.

kenny on November 8, 2012 at 3:39 PM

I thought I was the only one. We’re already talking on line other places about this.

Break it.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Seriously, even if people only qualify for < $100/mo in something, do it. Toledo just passed all the pork levies and property taxes. I am going to go recoup that and see if we can break even. I bet we can.

nitzsche on November 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

This might be useful as somewhat of a guide: In Entitlement America, The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60,000 A Year

…useful because most of us have never heard of some of these programs, like LIHEAP.

slickwillie2001 on November 8, 2012 at 3:40 PM

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:33 PM
No offense intended. I know that the anti-energy liberals are hurting a lot of people.

kenny on November 8, 2012 at 3:39 PM

I took no offense Kenny.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:40 PM

slickwillie2001 on November 8, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Bookmarked.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Looking at the typos of mine in this thread, I really need to go too. :-)

But the point wasn’t just me or nitzsche, what do “you” qualify for. Look into getting a subsidy for a green purchase. I’m thinking about relooking alternative energy for my house. I was to the point where I couldn’t really see shelling out the bucks for PV cells or Solar Heat panels and I didn’t want to burden the tax system with the incentives. (Up to 35 percent of a close to 38K install) Now I say, what sane person wouldn’t?

What do you qualify for? Research. Take. It’s there for the asking.

Break it.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Oh, I fully understood the point you were making. However, if anyone deserves to take advantage of what is out there it is the military.

Then again, they are the last ones to line up for bennies.

The smart people should take what they can and do the smart thing and prepare. If that means using government money for basics and hoarding the rest, then for the next few years that might not be a bad idea.

While there’s part of me that feels bad for the honest people out there that are really going to hurt for the stupid and lazy, there’s another part of me that wants to see it burn down and see what comes out of it.

We did honestly try to avoid it either way.

kim roy on November 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM

kim roy on November 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM

When it dries up, it dries up for everyone. Even those not paying anything into the benefits. In our thinking, it’s the only way to show those on the take that there is no magic money tree.

hawkdriver on November 8, 2012 at 3:51 PM

This producer of the film is a political prisoner…nuff said

workingclass artist on November 8, 2012 at 4:14 PM

‘Innocence of Muslims’ filmmaker sentenced to a year in prison for ‘parole violation’

A political prisoner for all intents and purposes.

Dr. ZhivBlago on November 8, 2012 at 4:16 PM

Oh, I fully understood the point you were making. However, if anyone deserves to take advantage of what is out there it is the military.

Then again, they are the last ones to line up for bennies.

The smart people should take what they can and do the smart thing and prepare. If that means using government money for basics and hoarding the rest, then for the next few years that might not be a bad idea.

While there’s part of me that feels bad for the honest people out there that are really going to hurt for the stupid and lazy, there’s another part of me that wants to see it burn down and see what comes out of it.

We did honestly try to avoid it either way.

kim roy on November 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM

I would recommend people start cheating on their taxes. I don’t want to pay Sandra Fluke 18k a year to have sex with other people. I wouldn’t even pay her to have sex with me.

When the aims of the government turn against the health and welfare of the people, it is no longer unethical or immoral to withhold your taxes from them.

And most of us here have families of our own to take care of. We literally can’t afford the whims of those who vote themselves free stuff from our pockets.

Alberta_Patriot on November 8, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I would recommend people start cheating on their taxes. I don’t want to pay Sandra Fluke 18k a year to have sex with other people. I wouldn’t even pay her to have sex with me.

When the aims of the government turn against the health and welfare of the people, it is no longer unethical or immoral to withhold your taxes from them.

And most of us here have families of our own to take care of. We literally can’t afford the whims of those who vote themselves free stuff from our pockets.

Alberta_Patriot on November 8, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Easy. The earner in the family gets a new address for everything, like his brother’s house for example. Then the other parent signs up for all the government bennies. Go to the food stamp place and say “I gots moufs to feed and I needs help from brother Obama”.

slickwillie2001 on November 8, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Even though it’s a ‘little’ out of their “jurisdiction”, the Joint Chiefs and Petraeus should speak out on this miscarriage of justice. Oh wait, they are all for it and more, much more.

VorDaj on November 8, 2012 at 5:42 PM

His pleading guilty further serves to reinforce my belief that Youssef – and the video – are both plants. This whole situation screams “false flag operation” to my ears, but I will admit that perhaps I’ve read too much espionage history and too many spy novels.

allanbourdius on November 8, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Selective enforcement of the law is all it takes to create a chilling effect on free speech.

You don’t need any new laws, just legal enforcement of the many, many thousands of laws that currently exist.

Second point; Those who resist the government aren’t always going to be choir boys…in fact they very often are not because those who have slide over into breaking the law are more likely than a decent law abiding citizen to resist tyranny because its not that big a step for them. It will take a lot for the average to guy to say enough is enough.

I talked with a member of the French Resistance and he said that a lot of them had been petty criminals and communists before the war. They weren’t what you would want as neighbors but they fought the good fight.

sharrukin on November 8, 2012 at 6:24 PM

“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” – Guess who?

Rollie on November 8, 2012 at 7:43 PM

this is scary stuff people..this guy may of done this on purpose to promote blasphemy laws but it’s the principle of it all..he got freaking arrested(screw the parole violation ) for a video about Muhammad!

sadsushi on November 8, 2012 at 7:46 PM

A year in a California Prison?

How long do you think it will take for a Muslim inmate to carry out the Death to Blasphamers sentence?

And despite the protestations that there was nothing political about this, how do you think this looks to Abu Abu in Durka-Durkastan?

It looks to him like the President of the United States acted quickly to punish the blasphamer who defamed Mohammed.

schmuck281 on November 8, 2012 at 8:17 PM

This guy has a pretty serious prior. Doesn’t that matter? I’m a victim of ID theft and I guess I don’t really care if the guy who stole my personal information and is still ON PAROLE got his full constitutional rights because…you know…he’s still serving time – just not in a prison. He’s a criminal, a con-artist, and from what I can see he’s a better criminal that he is a filmmaker or hero of the cause.

From the link-
Youssef will spend his time behind bars at a Southern California prison. He previously served most of his 21-month prison sentence for using more than a dozen aliases and opening about 60 bank accounts to conduct a check fraud scheme, prosecutors said.

After he was released from prison, Youssef was barred from using computers or the Internet for five years without approval from his probation officer.

“This is a defendant who has engaged in a long pattern of deception,” Dugdale said. “His dishonesty goes back years.”

kaja on November 8, 2012 at 11:57 PM

The film portrays Muhammad as a religious fraud, womanizer and pedophile.

True, true and true. Why was the guy in trouble again? He made a 13 minute video in which 18 out of 19 scenes are readily verifiable from Islam’s own scriptures. The truth about Muhammad rightly offend me and Muslims seem extremely angry that I should know these truths – they don’t seem angry that their “prophet” really did all these things.

Blasphemy means its a crime in the Muslim world for unbelievers to repeat the truth in Islam’s own holy books – this is bizarre but what one should expect from a Cult. Now however its also a crime in the USA for unbelievers to repeat the truth of Islam’s own books.

This makes sense of it:~
“The UN’s Resolution 16/18, calling for criminalization of incitement to religious hatred…”

http://www.oic-oci.org/ex-summit/english/10-years-plan.htm

Liam1304 on November 9, 2012 at 4:41 AM

Nothing new here folks, Youssef is not the first Obama political prisoner.

Lt. Col. Terry Lakin was dismissed from the Army, court martial-ed and imprisoned in Ft. Leavenworth for six months because he didn’t believe Obama was a legitimate president. Lakin was denied under UCMJ to defend his case.

Retired U.S. Navy Officer Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III was arrested and criminalized for attempting to present treason info on Barack Hussein Obama to a Tennessee grand jury. Fitzpatrick was actually tortured in a Tennessee prison by local authorities, and almost died.

byteshredder on November 9, 2012 at 12:28 PM

The ONLY central figure totally INNOCENT in the Benghazi scandal is imprisoned. That’s poetic justice Chicago-style.

MaiDee on November 9, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2