Records changed after librarian reported porn

WorldNetDaily ^ | April 03, 2008 | Bob Unruh

[editor-surveyor]

Personnel records used to justify the dismissal of a librarian who reported to police a man viewing child pornography on a public computer were changed after her dismissal, according to a law firm working on behalf of Brenda Biesterfield.

That, however, hasn't stopped the county from justifying its actions and citing the changed records.

"The actions of Tulare County officials in firing Brenda Biesterfeld are simply inexcusable," said Mathew D. Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University's school of law.

"She should be reinstated and compensated for the injustice done to her," he said. "The Tulare County Library ought to adopt clear policies informing their staff of the duty to report child pornography to police authorities. Just as taking crack in a library cubicle is illegal and must be reported, even more so should child pornography be reported. It is an unspeakable crime against children."

[editor-surveyor]

The purpose of libraries is becoming clearer by the day, and it has nothing to do with books.

[editor-surveyor]

"It also was Hill who, when police made the arrested and confiscated the computer, told officers they had no business enforcing the child pornography law within the library."

No wonder cities are clamoring to build huge new libraries!

[editor-surveyor]

The new morality?

[BurbankKarl]

I posted the original article...it figures that they went back and changed the employee records...they are on very thin legal ground...actually, they are on no ground at all...

[SeaHawkFan]

If Liberty Counsel is involved, the County is going to lose. Besides, it is a pretty slam dunk case to begin with.

[editor-surveyor]

"actually, they are on no ground at all..."

But it never seems to stop them, does it?

[MarineBrat]

Usually it’s “follow the money.” In this case it’s “follow the sound of the snapping carrots!”

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[polymuser]

The mental disease of neoliberalism at work, using your tax dollars and exposing children. God help America.

[editor-surveyor]

"Besides, it is a pretty slam dunk case to begin with."

But in California, it will be after a lengthy voyage through the courts, most likely.

[Red Badger]

I would think that FALSIFYING PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RECORDS IS A CRIME PUNISHABLE BY LAW!!>.......

[editor-surveyor]

"I would think that FALSIFYING PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RECORDS IS A CRIME PUNISHABLE BY LAW"

Only if the perp is a Republican, in California.

[BurbankKarl]

But they are librarians! They are above the law!

[Red Badger]

Above the law, and beneath contempt........

[Marysecretary]

Liberals and library folk live in a parallel universe, so it seems.

[SeaHawkFan]

For all the complaints abut the 9th Circuit, they are really good about protecting employee’s civil rights.

[capt. norm]

We don't want to invoke the wrath of "Conan The Librarian".

[nicko]

my wife is the most pragmatic, intelligent, grounded, common sensed individual I’ve ever known; she spent 20 some odd years with me during my military career, which in and of itself says something...and she’s a librarian-

[Publius6961]

I would think that FALSIFYING PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RECORDS IS A CRIME PUNISHABLE BY LAW!!.......

Bears repeating.
It should also be a firing offence to all involved in the flasification.

[Jonah Johansen]

I was on a library “Internet Policy” committee 8 years ago. The Library Director and most of the professional librarians (MLS degrees) were in favor of allowing patrons to surf Internet porn even XXX rated hard core porn. The only exception being child porn because that was actually illegal.
I was vehemently opposed to this on moral grounds and because I was one of those people who had to deal with porn addicts on a daily basis.

It was a very heated discussion. I did my home work/research, I refuted every one of their arguments, shot down every one of their points. I even bested the attorney they brought in to argue it was unconstitutional to ban pornography. (He hadn't done his homework)

The climax came when I confronted the Library Director with the following hypothetical. Suppose someone at the library was displaying on their computer screen, hardcore XXX rated graphic pornography and a mother and her 9 year old daughter asked you if there were any unoccupied computers. Suppose the only unoccupied computer was right next to the porn viewer. Suppose their was no way the mother and daughter could approach or use the one unoccupied computer without being exposed to the XXX rated images; What would you do? Would you say nothing to them or the guy viewing porn and just direct them to that one unoccupied computer knowing they would be exposed to that filth against there will? The director answered without a pause, without even reflecting for a second, yes he would. He would not say anything to either party. I simply shook my head in disbelief.

Shortly after, there was a vote of the committee. The vote was 11 to 2 with only me and one other voting against full access to XXX rated pornography.

Postscript: Interestingly enough in the years since that decision this library and many others have installed filters and taken action to reduce or eliminate porn surfing. This particular library now has a very strong filter that blocks not just porn but pretty much all nudity and even sex themed dating services. They have done this without any complaints from the public.
Nationally, as far as I can tell the ACLU, in recent years, has not done anything to reverse this trend, I don't know of any cases the ACLU has pursued, in the last 5 years or so, against libraries blocking pornography for adults and children.