Posted on 01/25/2006 12:05:00 PM PST by danno3150
Newton officials are calling their refusal to allow FBI agents access to library computers without a warrant during a terrorist threat last week “their finest hour.”
Law enforcement officials say it’s a “nightmare.”
Police rushed to the Newton Free Library after tracing a terrorist threat e-mailed to Brandeis University to a computer at the library.
But requests to examine computers Jan. 18 were rebuffed by Newton library Director Kathy Glick-Weil and Mayor David Cohen on the grounds that they did not have a warrant.
Cohen, defending the library’s actions, called the legal standoff one of Newton’s “finest hours.”
“We showed you can enforce the law — without jeopardizing the privacy of innocent citizens,” the mayor said.
It took U.S. attorneys several hours to finally secure a warrant, Glick-Weil said, and they took the computer from the library at about 11:30 that night, after the library had closed.
Brandeis received the alleged e-mail threat at about 11 a.m., according to Waltham Lt. Brian Navin. While police reportedly didn’t find anything threatening after evacuating 12 buildings at Brandeis and a nearby elementary school, by about 2 p.m., the e-mail was traced to a computer at the Newton Free Library.
Newton police, followed shortly by FBI and state police officers, rushed to the library to lock the building down, Glick-Weil said.
“There was a lot of excitement going on,” she said.
An FBI spokesman, as well as Lt. Bruce Apotheker of the Newton police, both said their offices would not comment on the investigation.
But a law enforcement official close to the investigation said in an e-mail the confrontation was a “nightmare.”
Nancy Murray, director of education for the Boston branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she was surprised the FBI asked for information without a warrant.
“They couldn’t possibly expect to get (the computer) without a warrant,” she said. “Good for the library for knowing more about warrants than the police.”
I could be wrong, but I have always assumed that the records of public libraries are a matter of public record.
You barely escaped this time
It was probably a set up by them...they knew the library wasn't going to blow...so they exercised what they think is their right...to get back at W.
Agreed,but that woudn't matter in Newton.To give you an idea of what I'm saying,keep in mind that Newton is heavily Jewish but the majority of the resident think that Israel is the second most dangerous and oppressive nation on Earth, after the US.
An argument can be made that the public owns the computers and not the government.
Given the way most libraries are funded, I'd have to challenge that statement.
Public library and the folks wanting access to the computers were citizens. Anyone sitting at one of the computers would have had the same basic access to anything that they would have...
Why would the FBI not possibly expect to get the computer without a warrant? Warrants are only required when the party you want information or materials from does not wish to give it up voluntarily. Why wouldn't the library wish to do so?
It has nothing to do with the FBI not knowing more about warrants than the library does. It has to do with the FBI thinking, incorrectly in this case, that the library might understand that when lives are possibly at stake, they should expect some cooperation from a public official.
If I lived in Newton, I'd move that the librarian be fined or fired.
"It's a judge's call to define probable cause, not a librarian's - that's why law enforcement officials are required to secure a warrant before conducting searches."
Couldn't this fall under the category of a hot pursuit? It reads like a terror threat was recieved, immediately traced to a specific location, and when the cops arrived, a bureaucrat says not so fast.
If someone is shot on the street in front of the library, and the perp is seen to run inside, do the police need a warrant to pursue?
"If it were me, I might have agreed to the search given the circumstances if it were explained reasonably, but since I wasn't, I'll go with door number 1."
Brings me to another question...does one need a warrant to search a public building?
And I think and argument could be made to get the warrant, then arrest the librarian as an accessory for knowingly allowing their computers to be used for terrorist activities.
Then she would have more articles in the bill of rights to assert.
I would've told the librarians, "Look no further, folks, we found the originators of the bomb threat," cuffed them, and given them the "diesel treatment."
So, if say Boston gets nuked due to an email from this library, is the town of Newton liable while they sat around waiting for a warrant?
The library may have been within their rights, but not their right minds. The 4th amendment search rules can be annulled via consent - which is what the librarians withheld, forcing the use of a warrant. Because the library is not a private space, there is arguably no reasonable expectation of privacy on behalf of the user of a computer library.
I hope their obstinancy never causes harm or death to an innocent due to delays in investigating by the police/FBI.
My $.02
I don't know, but an interesting read is at a DOJ web page Here "Searching and Seizing Computers and Obtaining Electronic Evidence in Criminal Investigations."
Then declare martial law. Or change the Amendment. The fourth Amendment is very clear.
She is knowingly covering up for a terrorist. She can say, "yes", and she has no obligation to say, "no".
If the police came to my door and said my house guest, who is hiding in the basement, was suspected of terrorism and asked to speak to him. I would say, "Right this way, officer".
I would not say, "Go get a warrant", and hope he gets away.
I would be harboring a fugitive, in spirit, if not in fact, and the librarian is harboring a terrorist, in spirit, if not in fact.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.