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 its 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 librarys actions, called the legal standoff one of Newtons 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 didnt 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 couldnt possibly expect to get (the computer) without a warrant, she said. Good for the library for knowing more about warrants than the police.
So the government doesn't need a warrant to search computer files? What else may the government search without warrant, in your opinion? Does this standard cease to apply when a dem is president? Was there a secret footnote somewhere in the Amendment that stated it doesn't apply to computers or a terrorism investigation? Again, why can't you change the Amendment if you want the government to be able to conduct warrantless searches?
I hope their obstinancy never causes harm or death to an innocent due to delays in investigating by the police/FBI.
My $.02
Worth more than 2 cents, IMO.
It's common sense, and though I agree with your reasoning, I have a hard time thinking the Constitution should be suspended simply because a government agency deems it necessary to further an investigation.
Where then is the protection of us all.
And you point is? If I need a set of pipe wrenches should the government keep a set handy so I could use them? If the government maintained a tool shed full of tool for folks to borrow, it would be swell, but that is why there are tool rental places.
They're 'luxuries' that allow members of society to improve themselves. As such, libraries facilitate societal improvement and advancement.
And your point is? People can improve themselves with out a government subsidy.
Libraries main function is to transfer wealth to government workers, provide them with a nice retirement, and free health care for life. All else is secondary. If a library administrator had to choose between paying a retirement benefit or buying a new book the answer is obvious and reflects the priorities of the library.
When these government workers refuse to help track down a potential terrorist, they do not deserve a place at the public trough.
if anything happens, I hope it can be traced back to their 'finest hour' and laid in their lap
You're assuming facts not in evidence.
She might have been told a threat was generated from one of the library computers, but from the article, I can't say she knew it was a terrorist.
Go read the DOJ page I linked in #58. It's obvious it difficult to get a good handle on this.
Exactly. If you haven't done anything wrong you don't have anything to worry about.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
4th AMENDMENT:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, [including library records] and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Every public official in the USA, [including librarians] are sworn to protect & defend the Constitution..
good point. as a public domian paid for by taxpayers, I think the feds can enter and get what they want.
What else may the government search without warrant, in your opinion?
The Government does not need a warrant to request to search anything, anywhere, anytime. If you give them permission they still don't need a warrant to conduct the search. They only need a warrant if they are not granted permission.
Privacy and Confidentiality Policy
Newton Free Library
Privacy and Confidentiality Policy
Newton Free Library is dedicated to protecting the privacy and confidentiality of our patrons. Our policy complies with the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 78, Section 7 (1994 edition): Part of the records of a public library which reveals the identity and intellectual pursuits of a person using such library shall not be a public record as defined by clause Twenty-sixth of section seven of chapter four. This policy extends to circulation records (borrowing records, registration records, reserves or fine records), interlibrary loan transactions, registration records, database search records and reference interviews. Except in cases involving the USA Patriot Act, no records can be made available to any inquiries, governmental or otherwise, unless a subpoena has been served by a court of competent jurisdiction and the library administration has consulted with legal counsel to determine if it is proper to release the requested information,
Our staff must support this policy of privacy and confidentiality. Not only is it the law, but it is the librarys long commitment to protecting the patrons right to access information freely. In accordance with the law, the policy restricts our staff from disclosing information with the cardholders family or friends. This applies to the release of information to the parents of minors when the minor has their own library card. The Supervisor of the Public Records of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Carolyn Kelly MacWilliam, stated in May 1997, A public library may not disclose records which reveal a minors borrowing information to the minors parent, regardless of whether the parent is paying the fine on an overdue item or the parent has signed the childs library card application form.
At times our commitment to confidentiality may be an inconvenience. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated by the staff as by everyone who is protected by these laws.
I would think that they were trying to get the info/perp as fast as possible - like in an emergency?
What if the threat was real and someone died? Would the librarian be arrested?
Ditto.
has anyone entertained the thought this could have been a setup like the sodomy packers did in TX?
This is the court of public opinion, the rules of evidence are different :-)
Go read the DOJ page I linked in #58
A bit over my head. I am not sure that the fact that these are computers is essential.
Let's say that they found a bomb and there was evidence that the bomb was made in the library's bathroom. Such as, they found a trash can labeled "property of...", in the dumbster outside, with residue on it.
If the police then went to the library and said, "we'd like to look at your facilities". Do you think the library should try to stop them?
So, I'll add another worm to the can.
You're advocating the right for federal authorities to usurp state or city funded institutions simply because they're feds?
Yep, just like patient record in a municipal hospital
And I think that it would be different if they were really investigating the librarian for, say embezzlement.
It would be different also, if Ted Kennedy were trolling the library's records to see if Judge Alito had checked out "King and King".
It isn't always a sacred duty to obstruct the police.
And just because they can get away with aiding a terrorist, doesn't make it right.
not because they're the feds, but because it's public,open to anyone and paid for by everyone.I don't see why they couldn't get a warrant. it's not like the librarians or patrons were hiding or smashing hard drives or the library was going any where.
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.