BREAKING… UPDATE 5:45 PM: U.S. District Court Judge Suzanne Segal has
ruled that the anti-Islam Innocence Of Muslims film producer known as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula will be held in the Metropolitan Detention Center after his arrest earlier today on probation violations. He will remain in the jail until a revocation hearing is scheduled. The judge said she was detaining him because ”the court has a lack of trust in the defendant”. She explained that he has engaged in a lengthy pattern of deception in a variety of situations, and that he poses “a danger to the community”. Nakoula today told the court that his real name is Mark Basseley Youssef. He is being cited on 8 probation violations for which the probation office is recommending 24 months in custody.
His lawyer Steven Seiden argued it would be a danger for Nakoula to be in custody in the Los Angeles County jail because of the large Muslim population there. Asst. U.S. Attorney Robert Dugdale said: “I’ve been assured that he’d be protected in custody. It’s likely he’d be safer in custody than out of custody.”
There was little mention of Nakoula’s crude film trailer whose posting on YouTube has sparked rioting, violence, and deaths in 30 countries in the Mideast, Europe, and Asia since 9/11. The prosecutor remarked that Nakoula’s pattern of deception extended to the hiring of the film’s actors. “They had no idea who he really was and no idea that he was a felon, and he parlayed that into the making of the film.” The prosecutor also indicated that Nakoula may have financed the film under deceptive circumstances. “Granted, if you look at the film, it doesn’t look like it cost much money.”
PREVIOUS 3:15 PM, BREAKING… There is a courtroom proceeding this afternoon in the Roybal Federal Building in Downtown LA regarding what the feds are saying is the arrest of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, 55, reputed filmmaker of the anti-Islam film Innocence of Muslims which has sparked rioting, violence, and deaths in 30 countries in the Mideast, Europe, and Asia since 9/11. An initial appearance in USA v. Nakoula, 09-cr-00617-CAS, has been scheduled on or after 3 PM today. Nakoula was arrested for violating terms of his probation and is set for an initial appearance in U.S. District, which sentenced him in June 2009 following a bank fraud conviction. Federal officials were looking into whether Nakoula violated his probation in that case by uploading the crude film’s 14-minute trailer onto the Internet. He and his family have been in hiding since he was voluntarily interviewed by federal authorities and has since put up for sale his Cerritos home where some of the video was shot.
Nakoula served 21 months in prison on 2009 federal bank fraud and aggravated identity theft charges and a $795K fine. He now could face more prison time if it is determined his involvement in the film was a violation of his probation, which barred him from either owning or using devices with access to the Web for five years without prior approval from his probation officer. Earlier, when LA County sheriffs escorted him to a police station for FBI questioning, Nakoula left his family’s Cerritos home with his head wrapped in a towel to hide his identity.
His arrest today is an apparent U.S. attempt to appease worldwide Muslims and their clerics and governments demanding for the YouTube video to be removed and its filmmaker punished. In an address on Tuesday condemning the content of the video, President Obama explained, “The strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech.” This legal action is a way to preserve America’s First Amendment principles but at the same time find a roundabout but legitimate way to punish Bakoula for the crudely made film that portrays the Muhammad as a religious fraud, womanizer and pedophile.
Related: Latest: Actress Refiles ‘Innocence Of Muslims’ Lawsuit In Federal Court
In most federal cases alleging probation violations, the probation officer submits a confidential report to the sentencing judge who has the option of holding a probation revocation hearing. Then the judge can send the defendant to prison or impose additional terms of probation without jail time. But first the probation violation has to be proven, and Steven Seiden is Nakoula’s defense attorney in this matter. Nakoula may argue that he’s being singled out on a probation technicality for exercising his right to free speech.
At first, Innocence Of Muslims was ignored even when trailers were posted on YouTube in July. But then Egyptian television aired certain segments, which sparked protests which intensified with the deaths of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and other U.S. personnel. When news of his movie first broke, the filmmaker identified himself to media as Sam Bacile and made up lies about his identity. But the paperwork filed for the Screen Actors Guild was that of Abenob Nakoula Bassely. A public records search showed an Abanob B. Nakoula residing at the same address as Nakoula. Now the filmmaker is believed to be a Coptic Christian with many aliases. Details about the purported filmmaker have emerged over recent weeks:
– Court records show that Nakoula was once a federal informant. The Smoking Gun obtained a transcript showing attorneys for Nakoula pleaded for “cooperation points” when their client was sentenced in 2010. Lawyers argued cooperation with prosecutors in a separate case should be taken into consideration.
– Family members of Nakoula have left their Cerritos home to join him in hiding. Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies escorted members of Nakoula’s family out of the house early Monday and into sheriff’s vehicles so they could rejoin Nakoula at an undisclosed location.
– News reports claim a second filmmaker, Joseph Nassralla Abdelmasih, president of Media for Christ, is an associate of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula.
– Film LA released the permit (read it here) for the film, which lists Media for Christ as the production company. Names and contact information for the producer, director and other crew members were redacted. The permit covers a one-day shoot at Blue Cloud Ranch in Santa Clarita for the film Desert Warriors, which has since become known as Innocence Of Muslims.
– Nakoula was connected to the persona of Sam Bacile, a federal law enforcement source told the AP. A man calling himself Sam Bacile initially claimed to be the writer and director of the film, but doubts surfaced regarding his identity. He has no credits on any movie industry database and SAG-AFTRA tells Deadline they have no information about the film; the DGA confirms they have no ‘Sam Bacile’ on record. It appears that Bacile is one of many aliases Nakoula used, the AP noted.
– The YouTube profile ‘Sam Bacile’ was used to post clips of the film on July 1 and comments as recently as Tuesday last week. It lists the age of the account holder at 74. Nakoula is believed to be 55.
– Another man, Steve Klein, told CNN he worked with Bacile on the movie vetting the script. Klein is an insurance agent and self-described militant Christian activist who resides in Hemet, CA.
– There are accounts of the film being screened in June under the name Innocence Of Bin Laden. According to Klein, Nakoula wanted to give it a title that would draw in and then trick “hardcore Muslims” into watching a movie that slammed Islam. But according to Klein, no tickets were sold and Nakoula was “crushed,” the AP said. Klein told The Times “felt great” about consulting on the film.
– CNN received a statement from the 80 or so people in front of and behind the cameras denouncing the film they say they worked on without knowing it was propaganda.


Not coola for Nakoula!
Stop perpetiulating a lie!! The film had nothing to do with the deaths and rioting!!!
On what basis? Surely not for making a film that some people find offensive, RIGHT? Did he lie under oath? Will the feds be arresting Monty Python any time soon? Ricky Gervais? If I murdered my neighbor because of something Ricky Gervais wrote, should Ricky Gervais be arrested?
He broke his parole by going on the internet.
They are “looking into” whether he violated parole by accessing internet.
Sorry, this is selective prosecution. Are they checking every other federal parolee and making sure they haven’t accessed the internet??? I wonder how many federal parolees have had their parole revoked on the basis of accessing the internet?
Obama – the administration that killed the First Amendment. Can you imagine what would have happened if GW had done this? Clearly, this is the zenith of media hypocrisy.
Actually, I think your comment is the nadir of hysterical ‘blame-throwing.’
Prosecutors taking what they can get has been standard practice since the rule of law began. Al Capone was sent to prison on charges of Tax Evasion, for Christ’s sake.
Oh, and I’m pretty sure GW opening Guantanamo Bay is a far broader and more egregious breach of First Amendment AND basic human rights than anything here. Calm down. A heart attack on a Friday afternoon will seriously mess with your weekend.
This is laughable….Our govt is trying to hang their judicial hat on SOMETHING, ANYTHING to appease the international crazies out there…We can’t in good faith actually prosecute him for anything as it would be in violation of free speech…BUT have you SEEN the trailer??? Worse than Ishtar and that’s sayin a lot. …The fake beards, the TERRIBLE laughable acting,the Midwestern dialects….yikes.
The filmmaker should be put in prison for being the worst director in the world…..I’d vote for that .
Deadline’s previous article explained the legal issue:
“During the first week that the video began to spread, federal authorities interviewed presumed producer Nakoula and are determining whether he violated his probation. He served 21 months in prison on 2009 federal bank fraud and aggravated identity theft charges and a $795K fine. ABC News has reported he “could face more prison time if it is determined his involvement in the film was a violation of his probation, which barred him from either owning or using devices with access to the Web without prior approval from his probation officer.”
My question is, assuming he did check this with his probation officer, would uploading a movie to youtube even have been an issue? Wouldn’t the officer be more concerned with access to financial sites or any activity that might be construed as identity theft?
Did you read the article sir?
It wasnt there when he first posted. The article was updated while I was cutting and pasting my post from the previous article.
Simmer down. He violated the terms of his probation by accessing the internet, that’s the basis.
Freedom of speech is now dead. Trumped up charge of violating probation. Obama and his Justice Deparatment thugs will have not boundaries after November. Big Brother now rules the U.S To hell with all of you that have allowed this to happen.
Yo, Dick Wad (I’m assuming that’s what your initials stand for):
Go back and read the Patriot Act and adjust your definitions of “thugs” to correspond to reality.
There’s no evidence that he accessed the internet.
A relative or an associate could have very well uploaded the film clip.
Are you people serious– defending this as a legitimate arrest for a probation violation. This would man would not be in jail if he had posted funny videos of kittens. This is a political prosecution if there ever was one.
Probation violation
My thoughts exactly.
So you’re thoughts are that commenting without actually reading or understanding a subject are acceptable. I hope you put more “thought” into voting. The amazing thing is that you left your comment AFTER all the other people explained WHY he was arrested.
if you read the terms of his probation, which had a whole big list of restrictions, he is in violation of at least three, maybe four of these restrictions. He used the Internet in violation of terms of his probation. He used an false identity in violation of the terms of his probation. He used financial instruments with a false identity in violation of the terms of his probation. This guy has a history of Meth addiction. I hope he gets sent back to prison. He doesn’t deserve to be on the streets with the rest of us.
Stu wrote:
> If I murdered my neighbor because of something Ricky Gervais wrote, should Ricky Gervais be arrested?
Stu, if someone is on probation and written in the terms of their probation, which the defendant has to sign in front of the judge, that they are not to use the Internet during the time they are on probation. If they go and use the Internet and someone can prove that they did, then yes, they are in violation of the terms of their probation. It’s pretty clear. You should probably go and actually read through some of the stuff that’s already been put out on his case to which he was put on probation.
What Stu said.
wow. our country is officially in the sh*tter. somewhere, George Orwell is both crying and laughing.
I hope it’s to see if he is eligible for an Oscar this year…. in several categories.
My guess: for parole violation(s).
@Stu…for inciting a riot that resulted in deaths..a gray area but nonetheless.
Not a gray area actually (that whole 1st amendment thing), and that’s not why he was arrested.
That is not why he was arrested, dummy.
listen up sheep…it was a planned attack. nothing to do with the film or trailer
It was a probation violation of some sort.
On a parole violation: He was on probation after previously serving time for bank fraud and identity theft – one of the conditions of his probation was that he could not own or use devices with web access without consent from his parole officer… Yet he somehow uploaded multiple videos to YouTube…
a technicality used to silence him and protect Obama from looking like he’s locking someone up for using their first amendment rights…like getting Capone for tax evasion, except this guy did nothing wrong…he makes a movie about kittens or even trashing Romney and he’s free right now…parole violation is just the excuse they needed to shut him up and punish him for making an anti-islam film
Obama has to punish him, otherwise the muslim world will hate us.
they will always hate us
It’s not going to make any difference, especially since the alleged crime is a probation violation, not insulting Islam. So if the guy is found guilty, Muslims will be angry because Americans care about keeping white collar criminals on probation from accessing the internet, but insulting Muhammed is okay.
Which is true, but they will be angry about it. We can’t rewrite our laws and Constituion to mollify foreigners who don’t/won’t understand our values.
OTHERWISE?!?!?! You mean they don’t hate now, didn’t prior to this, and won’t after this?
You’re absolutely right. Because before this film, they loved us.
That’s hysterical.
He is technically being arrested on probation violations, but he is in the feds crosshairs and once you’re there, there is no escape. Muslims win.
Couldn’t agree more. Once the government wants you they will have you. Fact is other socities over history have used courts, and lawyers as pawns and excuses to enact their own form of “social justice”. Look at Soviet courts, Nazi courts, there is little difference. Trumped up charges are just that, trumped up charges. This is completely and utterly wrong, but its exactly where we are headed. Fact is most people who want him arrested want him arrested for embarassing BHO. Its really sad.
This is wrong. Any true American can see through this.
‘True’ ‘American’…??? Ha. Very funny. There is really no such thing as a ‘true’ ‘American’, just as surely as there is no such thing as ‘mankind’. There is, in truth, only a great mass of generally self-centered, willingly ignorant / unstudied / unlearned simpletons who, though they may [with ease] lay ‘claim’ to the title of ‘American’, lay claim, only to a very short lived possibility which, in truth, only lasted for a very short while, [perhaps less than 10 years time] after the initial deeds of the founding fathers of this proposed possibility of ‘America’; according to thier designes / idea.
The fact is, there is really NO such thing as a ‘true’ American, at least not in this days time. If there WERE such a thing, then even the presence of a single /solitary example would be enough to utterly incite what Jefferson and friends had in mind when they pre-visioned the unavoidable future necessity of conntinued ‘Revolution’, alas, in opposition to what was initially pre-foreseen [by them (including Washington if you've ever read his words)] as a CONSTANT and always indwelling need for personal / individual revolution against the temptation to be and remain ignorant of, and unexercised in—the hieght of Human Virtue…the very SAME Virtue which, according to them, WAS attached to the phrase : ‘Pursuit of Happiness’; happiness here meaning to be the equivalent OF said Indwelling potential FOR ‘Virtue / Human Excellence’.
The fact is, the proposed and much referrred to ‘Freedom of Speech’ as it is NOW habitually understood by self claiming ‘True Americans’, alas, has NOTHING WHAT SO EVER TO WITH, nor ANYTHING WHAT SO EVER IN COMMON with what the inventors of the once [potentially] great national experiment had in mind. But all of you DO so readilly ‘seem’ to think so.
The fact is, IF the person who released this so called ‘movie’ on U-Tube was, in any fraction of a way WORTHY of any such think as protection under ‘freedom of speech’, he would certainly NEVER have saw fit to USE said freedom as he obviously did to begin with, rather, he would have been FAR MORE interested in, and utterly consumed with the tack and task of elevating himself to meet the hieght of his own innate capacity for Human Virtue, aka : self excellence : self-mastery. THIS and NO OTHER SUCH interpretation WAS and even now IS the self same understanding as was invented and fought for BY the founding fathers of the now defunct ‘American Experiment’. There is NO SUCH THING as ‘American Truth’…there is ONLY the ‘business’ of economic interests, alas, as said interests go hand in hand with global and now ever more lawfully enforced consumerism, as said consumers are ‘programmed’ from birth to ‘be’ as ignorant as they indeed MUST be in order to think they ‘know’ what they are talking about—-when in fact—-they know naught. I digress. But I must admit it is quite humorous to see just how awefully unlearned people have become, and, how ignorant they indeed ARE in regards to the many ‘claims’ which the lot of you so readily attach to ‘freedom of speech’ in conjunctiion with the mental fantasy aligned with the words ‘True American’. -C. F. Testa
All of this for probation violation? What a joke. No wonder Julian Assange would rather camp out in the attic of some embassy in London than risk extradition to the Land of the Free, via Sweden, of all places. And I love how the media (not Deadline) uniformly calls it “a crudely made film” as if the adjective ‘crude’ and its adverb were the only words in this most expansive of all languages to describe it. It’s also hilarious, insane, SNL spoof-worthy, and nothing anyone should gets his turban in a twist over.
“His arrest today is an apparent U.S. attempt to appease worldwide Muslims”
- Right, that would be because appeasement is such a successful tactic. If only we’d thrown Salman Rushdie under a bus there’d have been no 9/11.
You have to be dumb to go into check-kiting. You have to be dumb and a low-life to make a mindlessly provocative film and deceive all the actors. But since stupidity is not a crime, they had to get him for parole-violation.
Germany 1933 redux.
The guy is a first-class loser in life and should be busted for violating his parole.
Probably the best thing that could happen to him is to be taken into custody. Parole violation or not, this is likely a trumped-up charge just to protect him. But actions have consequences. He knew what he was doing. I wouldn’t arrest him or turn him over to those extremist idiots who are calling for his head. But I wouldn’t go out of my way to protect him either.
Whether or not he violated parole, I think what worries people is whether or not the arrest would have taken place if the embassy attack and rioting had not also occurred. Considering the timing of the arrest, it is hard not to wonder if the arrest is politically motivated. Personally, I agree that this is very likely a legitimate arrest but you cannot blame Romney supporters for wondering if Obama got involved considering how close we are to the election. Unless that is proven, however, it would be unfair and unwise to assume that President Obama ordered the arrest.
Good points. It does seem unlikely that he would have been arrested on minor parole violations if it weren’t for the fervor about the film. I too would assume it is a technically legal arrest, but it does disturb me if it is the film that led to the arrest. I don’t see that particular film as legitimate political speech, but that is not for the government to decide.
Still, does it help Obama in the election to arrest him? I would think the opposite is true. It will play into to the whole “apologizing for America” “appeasing Muslims” narrative that many would like to accuse Obama of. I guess if the arrest stops all of the protests things may look better for Obama come election day, but it still seems to me more of a political liability.
They dug up a technicality to arrest and persecute him. His real violation is riling up Muslims. Why can’t they be honest enough to say that they don’t think he deserves 1st Amendment freedoms? This is an enormous travesty.
The government has not done anything to limit his free speech. Have they confiscated the film or stopped it from being seen by anyone who wants to see it? No.
The man was arrested for parole violations.
So, under your logic, if I put out a controversial film the first amendment grants me immunity from prosecution for any law I might break?
«The government has not done anything to limit his free speech.» Yes, they did: they asked YouTube, in other words, to remove the video.
His arrest today is NOT an apparent U.S. attempt to appease worldwide Muslims. That is a prejudiced presumption on your part.
Nakoula was on ‘probation’ (actually parole). Parole IS prison. It is a sentence. If the judge had told him that he must wear a sign saying “I am a Jerk” for five years, he would have worn the sign or spent five years in prison. If he has violated the terms of his parole, he may be ordered to spend the rest of his parole in prison. If he is found to have committed a crime while on parole, he will get ‘back-timed’ and have to do the whole five years in the joint in addition to any new penalties.
Nakoula is an idiot. There are much better First Amendment causes to fight for. I’d extradite him to Sudan just for being so stupid and arrogant.
My first comment wasn’t sufficiently sarcastic – I’m sickened by the attitude of the posters here who think there’s nothing wrong with this.
Piss Christ is back in New York, how many people are going to be murdered because of it? Will Obama do what he said at the UN and condemn this denigration of christian faith? As if.
If the limits of free speech are going to be defined by murderous savages, then get used to shutting up.
How exactly is free speech being limited? The dude was barred from accessing the internet as part of his probation. He accessed the internet, so he violated those terms. Hence, he gets arrested.
Why is that so hard to understand?
So you’re telling me that everyone that have “violated” their parole by accessing the internet gets arrested? They wouldn’t have anyone on parole.
That’s not what I’m telling you. I’m telling you that the guy obviously broke the terms of his parole, so he got arrested.
What you’re telling me is that you think it’s OK for people to break the terms of their parole.
because he wouldn’t have had his parole violated if he’d made a film about ANYTHING else…it’s because of this film’s subject matter that they even looked into him in the first place…if you don’t see something wrong with that then you’re blind
Extremely good points, gord. I mean, if I were to go out and kill 12 people tonight and blame it on Piss Christ, would they then arrest the artist for inciting me? (btw, arresting him on the grounds of having no fucking talent whatsoever wouldn’t be a bad idea). Spot on comment about the limits of free speech being defined by murderous savages. Apparently, as my father would always say, “The squeaky wheel gets the oil.” So I guess it’s now “The more murderously fanatic get their way.”
Yeah, yeah, sure, he was arrested on a parole violation cause he used the internet. No, I’m betting the terms were more specific than that, banning him from certain sites. Furthermore, I’m betting Nakoula had someone else upload the 14 minutes.
Any director, screenwriter, storyboarder, foley artist, etc. out there who isn’t outraged by a filmmaker being arrested for making a film should be fucking ashamed of themselves.
And yeah, foley artists should be up in arms about this.
No safer place for him than jail. Isolation if he’s lucky.
not the government’s job or right to lock him up for protection…he was free to make the film now he’s free to protect himself from whatever backlash there may be…government should not be involved in any way
This is just wrong on so many levels. Free speech is slipping away from us and we should all be standing up for this man. When it gets to the place you cannot offend Muslims in this country, we have lost our freedom. Muslims offend Christians and Jews around the world and no one holds them accountable. Free speech is under attack by the Obama administration. What will you do when they come after you for saying something they don’t like?
«Free speech is slipping away from us and we should all be standing up for this man.» Indeed. One person who can’t, literally, «stand up», but who should give his support, is Larry Flynt. «Mr. Hustler» is always ready to confront conservatives who, allegedly, want to stifle free speech. And now, what has he got to say?
This is really disgusting…
This is a direct quote from the article above…
“His arrest today is an apparent U.S. attempt to appease worldwide Muslims and their clerics and governments demanding for the YouTube video to be removed and its filmmaker punished. In an address on Tuesday condemning the content of the video, President Obama explained, “The strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech.” This legal action is a way to preserve America’s First Amendment principles but at the same time find a roundabout but legitimate way to punish Bakoula for the crudely made film…”
Why would someone try and find a “roundabout” way to punish someone for exercising their first amendment right? are you kidding me?