According to the New York Times, a federal judge has authorized the F.B.I. to search two public library computers used late last month by Bruce E. Ivins, the Maryland scientist blamed in the 2001 anthrax killings, to read about the investigation into the attacks.
Dr. Ivins took a fatal overdose of painkillers three days after visiting the C. Burr Artz Public Library near his home in Frederick MD, and investigators hope to find a suicide letter, writings laying out murder plots or other material that might help them in understanding the anthrax attacks, according to the Justice Department’s search warrant affidavit.
This is all rather bizzare
This is all rather bizzare in my mind
‘investigators hope to find a suicide letter, writings laying out murder plots or other material that might help them in understanding the anthrax attacks’
Because if I was planning a bioattack I’d leave proof of it on a public computer that anyone could use or look at after me!
We killed himself 3 days after visiting the library, maybe he visited Borders, have they searched for a bookmark with his suicide note on? Maybe he went to Starbucks, they’d better check the dumpsters for napkins with chemical formulae on them!
‘A Justice Department official disclosed Thursday that a court-approved search of Dr. Ivins’s home three days later turned up “hundreds of rounds of ammunition,” along with body armor, a ballistic vest and gunpowder.’
Were they illegal? The fact that it doesn’t say so makes me think it was all legal, in which case why bring it up? Second amendment right surely?
FBI Seach of Library Computers in Ivins Matter
The public owes, and does not realise it owes, a huge ‘thank you’ to the american librarian as a collective, who have so staunchly resisted all government attemtps to utilise the public librariary systems of this country for erosion and evasion of freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. I have no idea where the legal work is coming from — whether the ACLU is furnishing it, or it is being donated, or some other means is being used — but the librarians’ willingness to stand firm has surely carried a human cost to them and has also been astoundingly successful in many cases.
It does not matter so much that it was unsuccessful in the Ivins’ matter. What continues to be true is that such government acts will be met with open and well-handled legal resistance by libraries and librarians.
In the instant matter, I wonder what criminal investigation could possibly have served as the basis of the government’s search warrant. I am not a criminal lawyer, but my rudimentary understanding of 4th Amendment law suggests that an OPEN investigation must be an element of a successful petition for a search warrant. Since it appears the fact of Ivins’ suicide was accepted, it is illogical that an investigation in which he was the target could be considered ‘open’.
It is most unfortunate that apparently no further judicial review is possible in the instant case. I wonder precisely how the privacy rights of other users of the pc in question will be treated per the decision, or if the judge even addressed their rights in handing down the decision.
Libraries are the work place of the unemployed and disenfranchised; the temples of learning for us all; one of the few remaining safe places in most every sense of the word in an ever-changing and sometimes apparently degenerating society. Clearly, it is no answer to remove pcs from libraries, nor is it an answer to limit their use. Possibly though, it is time to consider acquiring and using some technology which will effectively remove the pc’s records altogether on a daily or even more frequent basis, so that next time the government comes knocking for such materials, they simply do not exist.
In my county, librarians are civil service employees. It seems obvious librarians are public employees in all public libraries. I know of no other group of government workers willing to take risks such as these for a principle.
Once agan, thank you for the effort.