Library Wouldn't Help Police Identify Woman Pulled From River -- Legislation Needs Amending

NewsNet5 WEWS Cleveland, OH ^ | Feb. 4, 2007 | Unknown

[plan2succeed.org]

LANCASTER, Ohio — Police tried to identify a woman they pulled from an icy river by checking on her library card, but the library would not cooperate, citing a policy set by its board.

The woman, who was treated for unknown injuries, was carrying her library card on a key ring but had no other identification when a passer-by found her in the Hocking River on Thursday night, police said.

So a dispatcher, then an officer called the Fairfield County District Library and were told the library could not release the information without a court order. The woman later was identified as Sheila Springer, 51, by someone at the local hospital where she was taken.

The woman was later taken to Grant Medical Center in Columbus, where she would not allow information to be released on Friday. The hospital said Saturday they had no information on Springer. There was no telephone listing for her. Police did not know how she got in the river.

The library's board set the policy of withholding information about cardholders, library Director Marilyn Steiner said Saturday.

However, Steiner said that after being contacted about the police request, she told her staff they could release the information if they were sure the caller was a law enforcement officer and it was "a matter of life or death." Steiner said the library was prepared to release the woman's identity about 10 minutes after the first call by police, but was told it was no longer necessary.

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. I CLAIM EXCEPTION UNDER COPYRIGHT FAIR USE PROVISIONS.

[Rb ver. 2.0]

"Presumably the card had her name on it"

That is so 1960's.

[plan2succeed.org]

You said, "Libraries are the terrorists best friends."

Sadly, you are very close to correct. And there have been numerous news reports and commentaries on this issue. But the best friends the terrorists have are the New York Times, the politicians that blame America first, and the media that reports the terrorist propaganda every day.

[wintertime]

I say it's time to amend similar laws nationwide to remove the radical agenda of the American Library Association's ,,,,,

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The same people who have so much influence over our government school indoctrination centers ( misnamed "schools").

[plan2succeed.org]

Just a smal example from a quick google search: http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/publib/2006-February/095976.html

[plan2succeed.org]

Well, a little. The NEA is the big cheese in public schools. But the goal of sexualizing children is something the NEA seems to have in common with the ALA. This might be an example regarding the NEA: http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/12/182006b.asp or maybe this: http://www.nea-exgay.org/

[Alouette]

The last time I was at the library, they would not give me the books my husband had put on hold because I was carrying my own card and not his. When I said to check both cards are for the same address, they still refused, claiming that it was for "privacy."

When my husband tried to renew his library card after it expired, the library insisted on seeing 2 pieces of ID. They would not accept his passport as a valid ID.

LIBRARIANS=CONTROL FREAKS.

[plan2succeed.org]

No, it's the ALA driving this, not individual librarians.

SafeLibraries.org - Are Children Safe in Public Libraries?

[Alouette]

ALA=CONTROL FREAKS.

[savedbygrace]

You're letting your hatred of the ALA cloud your brain. That's NOT a plan for success.

The woman's life was not endangered by the library's refusal to ID her. She was already receiving emergency treatment. What the library's refusal delayed was notification of relatives.

[linda_22003]

I'm a librarian too, and I agree with you. They followed the right protocol, and in fact were prepared to cooperate within a very quick timeframe. This is a non-story, posted by someone who just has a "thing" against libraries.

[wintertime]

They would not accept his passport as a valid ID.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

These communist witches would not accept a U.S. passport?

[wintertime]

No, it's the ALA driving this, not individual librarians.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Teachers use the same excuse. It's the NEA driving it, not teachers.

Balooney!

I bet those librarians can organize themselves very well for all sorts of issues, but,,,hm,,just can't get control of their OWN professional organization. Yeah! Right! ( eyeroll)

[plan2succeed.org]

You said, "I'm a librarian.... This is a non-story, posted by someone who just has a "thing" against libraries."

You're doing the attack the messenger thing. The article was in the news. I didn't make it up. It was already a story. I just brought it here to discuss -- the whole purpose of FreeRepubic. Your first response is to say you are a librarian and I should shut up. Thanks to FreeRepublic and other outlets, messages like mine no longer get shut up by people behaving as you have. I guess the freedom of speech thing doesn't apply to me. Do you realize your own actions help to exemplify the hypocrisy of the ALA's freedom of speech proclamations?

[linda_22003]

I didn't say you should shut up, did I? I don't see that anywhere in my post. You are determined to be a martyr, though. :)

[plan2succeed.org]

You said, "The woman's life was not endangered by the library's refusal to ID her. She was already receiving emergency treatment. What the library's refusal delayed was notification of relatives."

Many of you have the same argument -- essentially that there was no harm done.

Are you substituing your own judgement for the people involved in this matter? Aren't you assuming the police really had no need for information since their job is just to get her to a hospital and the hospital can worry about identifying her later? Do you think the police's need for the information was motivated merely by curiosity or perhaps an interest in helping the hospital get a head start on identifying the victim?

It appears to me that your statements evidence a decided bias against the police. And it is clear you have a decided bias in favor of the ALA policy as applied by the library. The actual library policy seems to allow for police emergencies, but it was applied in a way that seems to have ignored that provision.

Now neither you nor I were at the scene. While I have been asking questions and suggesting conclusions that may be drawn, you have been changing the facts to fit your own biases. Like the claim that it only took 10 minutes to decide to help the police. You leave out that the help for the police was refused. Only later was help offered, but it was too late by then. Yes, that may have only occured in 10 minutes, but saying it took 10 minutes to reach a decision clearly misrepresents the facts. You see, to make your case, it's apparent you need to rewrite the facts. Now what does that say about the weight one might give to your arguments?

[plan2succeed.org]

You're going after me personally again -- the "martyr" comment.

You DID essentially tell me to shut up. You said, "This is a non-story, posted by someone who just has a "thing" against libraries." The clear meaning of that, or at least what I inferred, is that I should shut up and say nothing about a "non-story," particularly since I have a "thing against libraries." Sounds like you are suggesting I should not have written this non-story in the first place -- that I should self-censor myself. You are telling me this, you just didn't use the words "shut up."

[linda_22003]

Since I seem to agitate you so, I wonder why you put me on your ping list for this topic. I didn't request it.

[linda_22003]

And you obviously DO have "a thing" or you wouldn't have changed the headline to put in your personal editorial.

[plan2succeed.org]

You do not agitate me. I really do enjoy speaking with you. I have asked, repeatedly, if people want on or off my list. You are welcome to stay on.

[savedbygrace]

Go back and re-read the very first sentence in the AP story. The police contacted the library because they were trying to ID her.

Now read the second sentence. The woman had been treated for unknown injuries (obviously, the hospital personnel knew what those injuries were, but they couldn't release the info, undoubtedly due to HIPPA regulations.)

Taken together, those two sentences say that the library was contacted only to ID the woman, not to enable treatment. Your post that I originally replied to seemed to claim that the woman was endangered by the library's refusal to provide the ID.

So, my conclusions are based on the facts as presented by the AP (I know, I know), whereas yours seem to have their source in the hatred you appear to have against the ALA.

In this case, you are wrong. Face up to it like a reasonable adult.