From the Chicago Tribune…
“The man charged with fondling himself in front of teenagers while viewing a pornographic Web site in Nichols Library in downtown Naperville, IL was released Wednesday from the DuPage County Jail after posting $500 bail.” Read More.
UPDATE posted by Rochelle, 9 am cst: The man has not been charged for obscenity violations, but for “with two counts of sexual exploitation of a child and two counts of public indecency” according to this story from the Daily Herald
Cooperation With the Police
The article had a quote from the police captain that the library is in the business of having a safe environment. Isn’t it funny that the police give an opinion that should be part of the librarian’s handbook. The behavior of the library staff and their interaction with the police should not be a standard. The police are there to keep order and enforce laws meant to make our society grow. Fighting them is not a good idea, cooperating with them is the way to go. How far are members of our profession going to go to defend supposed privacy issues. In this age of teenage indifference it should be noted that the teens did the right thing in reporting the behavior. The librarians gave the wrong signal to these responsible teens with their indifference and lack of cooperation with the proper authorities.
Re:Cooperation With the Police
Eli
Hmm. I did not realize that the library was in the business of providing a safe environment. If that was the case there would no need for the books, magazines or computers. Better yet, I would not have a MLS but a degree in public safety.
The police should not have instant access to library records without a court order. There was not an immediate threat of physical harm to anyone and they still caught the pervert.
Re:Cooperation With the Police
(The library) is in the business of providing a safe environment, too,” McGury said. “If I go in (to the library) and a criminal act has occurred, I should be able to get that information.”
End Quote
He was able to get the information AFTER getting the court order.
Re:Cooperation With the Police
I did not realize that the library was in the business of providing a safe environment
You didn’t? If you are open to the public, then you are required to provide a safe environment. Just ask a personal injury attorney.
BS
The library is not in the business of providing a safe environment. The library is in the business of providing books, information, reference services and the like. Everyone is in the business of using reasonable care to ensure the safety of others, be it a library or on your front stoop. Librarians don’t have to be policemen. No one is going to die because some freak is manipulating himself at the computers.
You can’t have it both ways, either library records are private or they are not. If the record is integral in the investigation of a crime that has occurred then it can be obtained by subpoena. There is no immediacy when the crime is over, and no need for the records if the crime is in progress.
That said, I would have detained the man until police arrived thus negating the need for the records. However I don’t suggest that any other librarian do the same until they are clear on their ‘citizens arrest’ powers (which exist in Illinois) and their ability to safely detain someone.
To suggest, as it seems the police chief did, that the library has a burden to use more than ordinary care to maintain the safety of the library is absurd. The police are charged with maintaining order and providing a safe environment. If they shirk that responsibility it is time to meet with the city officials and discuss replacing the police command.
The librarian that was alerted to the pervert had several options that would have been within the law. The decision to call the police to deal with the situation and refusing to release the records until compelled by the court was indeed one of the several options. Had it been a murder or assault in the library a court order can be obtained post haste, so I hope the librarians would withhold the records in that case as well.
When the cops work the circulation desk, I’ll start patrolling the streets.
Re:Cooperation With the Police
Which includes confidentiality laws, which a fair number of governments have in place. So, picture this:
Instead of the librarians upholding the laws the cops were too indolent to respect, they turned over the information and the cops hunted down the perp.
The perp shows up in court with a sharp lawyer who says that by turning over the information, the library violated the perp’s civil liberties and that the arrest and charges are fruits of a poison tree and the case must be thrown out of court.
The judge agrees and the perp walks free.
And instead of bitching and pissing and whining about libraries that protecting civil liberties, we spend our time bitching and pissing and whining about courts that protect civil liberties.
In place of all that, somebody can explain to the teens that the same laws keep the library from hassling them for being adolescents.
Re:BS
You miss the point. That particular crime was over. However, it’s clear that people who engage in those kind of activities don’t stop there. What he was doing was a “gateway crime”. How would you feel, for example, if, while the police were arguing with the library, this pervert, now fully aroused, had decided to walk down to the local elementary school and rape and murder several kids on the playground?
What needed to happen was that this perv needed to be busted and slammed in a cell while the cops figure out what his deal was. I can guarantee you that the sole incident in the library was not his first offence or the only bad thing that he had been doing.
It’s really too bad we don’t have preventive detention laws that would allow perverts like this to be held for life. They have an incurable disease that cannot be treated and should be locked away from society for everyone’s benefit.
Re:BS
The library is not in the business of providing a safe environment. The library is in the business of providing books, information, reference services and the like. Everyone is in the business of using reasonable care to ensure the safety of others, be it a library or on your front stoop.
Your third statement negates your first statement.
Every entity that is open to the public is required to maintain a safe environment. It is their legal duty. If the library mops the floor and neglects to put up a “wet floor/piso mojado” sign then they have breached that duty to maintain a safe environment. If somebody slips and falls, then they may be held liable. If the library is on notice that there are people assaulting children in the bathroom (not alleged in this situation) then the library may be held civilly liable.
There is a multi-billion dollar industry that feeds off of this, it is called the plaintiff’s bar.
Re:BS
I beg to differ with you. Being vigilant and aware of your patrons is the librarian’s responsibility. In Philadelphia a young girl was attacked by a homeless man in a public restroom. Suppose the person in Illinois after he got his jollys then went to a place in the building such as a restroom to do worse. The incident in Philadelphia caused a terrible public relations crisis for the library at a time when funding is being drastically cut. If a person especially one who is supposed to be in charge ignores their professional and citizen responsibilities then they are part of the problem.
Re:BS
In the Philly case where were the girls parents? If I am not mistaken, law enforcement is the responsibility of the police or the security service hired by the library.
Let’s be clear about this, the person(s) who caused the incidents were the pervs themselves, not the librarians in charge.
Re:BS
Wow, I thought I was the Fascist here. Even I think that is nuts.
Re:BS
The typical answer of a leftist. Wave the old “fascist” flag to discredit those you disagree with. It’s so typical of the left, devoid as they are of real solutions to problems, to simply attack people they disagree with as “fascists” — which actually is an insult to anyone who really understands the horrors perpetrated by a truly fascist regime.
Actually, the idea of preventive detention for sexual offenders is a well established issue within the legal community. Several states wither have such laws on the books or are considering them. I’d suggest that you do some research on the subject prior to simply dismissing the person as a “fascist” because you disagree with them.