Sunday, March 22, 2015

Orland Park Public Library Settlement Agreement

Here's the Settlement Agreement and Release (link) between Megan Fox (link), Kevin DuJan, and the Orland Park Public Library (link), signed by the parties with library director Mary Weimar signing for the library.  It is dated 19 March 2015.  The settled cases involved "the Illinois Freedom of Information Act, 5 ILCS 140, et seq. ('FOIA') and the Illinois Open Meetings Act, 5 ILCS 120, et seq. ('OMA')."

Here's a video of the attorney for the library describing the above Settlement at the library's 16 March board meeting:

Here is more media coverage:

I am directly involved in these cases, the settlement, and media reports, but not by name.  I'll be writing more about this matter in the future.

On this page I'm excluding my commentary so people can see the OPPL Settlement (link) without anyone's added viewpoint.  So feel free to spread around either URL below these headline graphics from the Chicago Tribune and the Orland Park Patch.

URL of this page:
The Settlement itself:

On Twitter: +American Library Association @AP @CookCntyCourt +DuJan Media @ECWDogs #FOIA @HemantMehta +Illinois Library Association @ILAttyGeneral @IllLibraryAssoc @IntolerantFox @HillBuzz @JacksonLewisPC @LaurenZumbach @LoevyAndLoevy +Megan Fox @MVTopic +Orland Park Public Library @OIF #OMA @OrlandParkPatch @OrlandPkLibrary #SunshineWeek @VillageOrlandPk

Saturday, March 7, 2015

Orland Park Public Library Still Covering Up Child Porn

The Orland Park Public Library (link) is the scene of the latest effort by a library to cover up its literally criminal ways, in this case award-winning criminal ways.  It did so by having published a letter to the editor of the Orland Park Prairie (link).  That prompted a response by the citizenry to expose the misinformation in the hope enough pressure is brought to bear to force the library board to change its anything-goes, law breaking policy.

Presented side by side are two letters to the editor, the first by elected library trustee Diane Jennings, pictured as right, and the second a response by library patron and child porn whistleblower Kevin DuJan.  Both were printed in the Orland Park Prairie:

Letters to the Editor

February 19, 2015

Library Staff Cares About 
Child Safety

Dear Editor,

As an Orland Park resident, library trustee and avid library user, I respond to recent letters questioning the Orland Park Public Library's commitment to child safety.

Specifically, some writers worry about patrons using the OPPL's computers to access inappropriate material on the Internet. A review of current OPPL policies and procedures at should dispel such concerns. They are stricter than those recommended by local and national library associations, and stricter than those followed by many Chicago-area libraries, including several nearby suburban libraries.

Consider the following.

The OPPL's first-floor collection and the activities held there are for children only. Adults are not allowed here, unless accompanying a child. All Internet access in this area is filtered.

The OPPL's teen collection is in the southwest corner of the second floor. All computers provided for teen use are filtered.

Computers accessible to adults are in the northeast corner of the second floor, with the adult collection. These computers are not filtered, but staff constantly monitors the area. No one under 18 may enter this computer area for any reason, and all users must first surrender to staff a picture ID containing their name, address and proof of age. Non-residents without an OPPL library card are allowed just one hour of use per day, for which they pay a fee.

The OPPL's policies in no way promote the viewing of child pornography. Instead, they expressly state that viewing child pornography or any other illegal material is prohibited. Violations may be reported to the police and subject to criminal prosecution. The policies ban even legal material that offends others within viewing distance.

The OPPL meets the needs of all its patrons. Children are kept safe, while adults are able to exercise their constitutional right to access information on the Internet without the interference of filters that block legitimate searches and sites along with those deemed "undesirable."

The OPPL's award-winning balancing of these interests makes our library both a family- and a user-friendly place. We can continue to rely on the professionalism and common sense of OPPL employees, as they serve everyone. Judging from the steady increases in visits, circulation and program attendance that the OPPL has enjoyed for many years, it seems that the majority of Orland Park residents agree.

Diane I. Jennings

Trustee, Orland Park Public Library Board

- See more at: [Note: paywall]
Letters to the Editor

March 5, 2015

More to the Story About 
Adult Computers at OPPL

Dear Editor,

I write in response to a letter to the editor published Feb. 19 that was written by a trustee of the Orland Park Public Library. Entitled, "Library staff cares about child safety," I feel it was misleading in the way it described the teen and adult computer areas of the OPPL and the problems therein.

No walls separate the OPPL's second floor adult computer area from the teen area. Both are open spaces bordered only by bookshelves, with only about 60 steps diagonally between them. While it may be true that library staff don't allow teens to use the adult computers and adults to use the teen computers, the OPPL's local history, political science, and Illinois studies sections are all located on bookshelves that form one of the boundaries of the adult computer area.

Specifically, all of the Chicago history books and the books about Orland Park itself are on shelves that directly face the rows of adult computers.

This means that teens needing these books for school reports must stand in unobstructed view of the adult computer area, with nothing but air separating them from the rows of adult computers. Since the OPPL is adamant about keeping the adult computers unfiltered and pornography is accessible on unfiltered computers, adults who become sexually aroused while viewing pornography at the OPPL would be in close proximity to teens who come to this area to find their history and political science books.

This is like butterflies being drawn into spiders' webs, because the OPPL has chosen to locate books the teens need for school reports right by the adult computers.

Because the adult computer area is an open space without walls, teens must also pass right by the rows of adult computers on their walk to the second floor study rooms. This is something else that was not noted in the Feb. 19 letter from the OPPL trustee. Adults using unfiltered computers to view pornography would come in contact with teens in this area, and they would also be using the same restrooms as the teens on the second floor.

Pornography is not an intellectual stimulant. It is a sexual stimulant. Sexual arousal and its resultant behaviors are neither appropriate nor safe in a public library. It is bad policy for the OPPL to ignore the many interactions between teens and adults on the second floor.

Kevin DuJan

- See more at: [Note: paywall]

© Copyright 2015, 22nd Century Media, LLC. All rights reserved.  Reused under Fair Use provisions.

Can you see the issues there?  Let me now provide my comments.

"questioning the Orland Park Public Library's commitment to child safety":

This is a library that serves up child pornography then covers it up—watch Diane Jennings admitting in public on 18 August 2014 that the library allowed and covered up child pornography (link).  This is a library where the public relations employee Bridget Bittman, knowing it serves up child pornography and covers it up, declared the library to be a "safe library" (link).  So now elected official Diane Jennings is worried about people "questioning the Orland Park Public Library's commitment to child safety."  Funny, in a sad way.  By the way, watch both Diane Jennings and Bridget Bittman attacking Kevin DuJan for being gay (link), and these are supposed to be the people telling us this public library is a safe library.

Let me add this.  A year ago and a half ago, when the child porn whistleblowers Megan Fox and Kevin DuJan began to become the target of the library's "crisis management" efforts for simply asking questions, the library was much less safe for children, let alone adults.  While the library refuses to use Internet filters that would be the best way to improve safety and become compliant with the law (link), it has quietly and without acknowledgement implemented nearly all of Fox's and DuJan's suggestions for improving safety.  This list is too long to enumerate here.  To the extent the library has effective child safety practices and procedures in place today, most have been thanks to Megan Fox and Kevin DuJan, no thanks to Diane Jennings and the rest of the library board.  It has taken all this time and many Illinois Attorney General and expensive court decisions to force the library to get to the point where we are today.  The only "commitment to child safety" the library has is to do as little as possible so as to placate the public while keeping the child porn flowing per American Library Association diktat.

"current OPPL policies ... are stricter than those recommended by local and national library associations":

A library that allows and covers up child pornography in no way has policies strict in any way.  Instead it has an anything-goes policy.  Further, the library allows unfiltered Internet access on the "adult" computers.  The library associations of which she speaks recommend libraries allow unfiltered Internet access, so the library is not "stricter."

I really think she has gone unchallenged or protected by the media for so long (link) that she feels she can make statements that are simply not supported by reality.  Think about it.  She makes blatant, anti-gay statements anyone can see in that video linked above, admits to the police she made such gay slurs (link), and yet she remains on the library board instead of being kicked off as the hater she is.  So naturally she feels there are no consequences for her statements because—there are no consequences for her statements.

"These computers are not filtered, but staff constantly monitors the area":

Wow.  Staff monitors the area.  And when they are sexually harassed by patrons who have been viewing porn, they are told by library director Mary Weimar that if they don't like it, they can leave.  Strong statement?  Well I'm just reporting.  Listen for yourselves to library employee Linda Zec in that very library describing how she was sexually harassed and told to get out if she didn't like it (link).  By the way, what happened to that employee and at least one other in that library is called "constructive discharge (link)," even if they don't realize it.  Indeed it took almost a decade for Linda Zec to even speak publicly about the harassment.  So much for "staff constantly monitor[ing] the area."

Besides, even if they "monitor[] the area," they are trained by the American Library Association to ignore criminality, so what Diane Jennings said is intentionally misleading:
Libraries and librarians are not in a position to make those decisions for library users or for citizens generally.  Only courts have constitutional authority to determine, in accordance with due process, what materials are obscenity, child pornography, or "harmful to minors." 
As for obscenity and child pornography, prosecutors and police have adequate tools to enforce criminal laws.  Libraries are not a component of law enforcement efforts naturally directed toward the source, i.e., the publishers, of such material. 
Source: "Guidelines and Considerations for Developing a Public Library Internet Use Policy (link)," by Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library Association, 26 March 2013, emphasis in original.
And there's the main reason the library allows and covers up child pornography.  Maybe ALA should be called the American Child Pornography Association.

Speaking of sexual harassment of librarians, I raised that issue in that community per the mission of SafeLibraries to provide balance for people to become fully informed before making up their own minds instead of being misled into a single choice—ALA's choice—no filters—unfettered access despite the law.  I said, "She completely leaves out that libraries that do not filter really do face years of litigation and significant legal expenses for librarians who are sexually harassed as a result of unfettered porn viewing occasioned by library policy direct from the ALA (link)."  Apparently I was effective because just eight days later ALA saw fit to appear before that community to retrain the minds of the public that sexual harassment never happened in that library, in any library in the past, and likely will never happen in the future (link).

As a result of this blatant and heartless fraud, I and Kevin DuJan created a new publication called, "Sexual Harassment of Librarians (link)."  We are the only source for gathering information for librarians sexually harassed in libraries that place following ALA diktat above following the law.  We know we have already helped librarians still being sexually harassed to this day.  Others may be intimidated by ALA; we are not, not even if ALA is involved in a federal lawsuit to silence us, arising in part out of Diane Jennings homophobic behavior while representing the Orland Park Public Library, no less (link).  Apparently, not only are "computers ... not filtered" in Orland Park, neither is Diane Jennings.

"all users must first surrender to staff a picture ID":

Hahahaha!  This one is so funny that Saturday Night Live starring Lady Gaga made a joke about it (link)!

"Non-residents without an OPPL library card ... pay a fee":

Just like viewing porn at porn shops!

"The OPPL's policies in no way promote the viewing of child pornography":

What Diane Jennings leaves out is that it follows American Library Association diktat to allow and take no action when child pornography is showing because, get this, librarians are not judges and may not decide what is child porn; only judges may decide and only for each one of the millions of porn websites (link).  So the library may not promote child porn viewing per se, but Diane Jennings leaves out that it is trained not to recognize what is child pornography.  Remember, this is a library that has already admitted to allowing and covering it up.  The very same people are still there to ensure a continued flow of unfettered child pornography since there were no consequences for the last incident of aiding and abetting child pornography or any other criminality.

"Instead, they expressly state that viewing child pornography or any other illegal material is prohibited":

Right, and I just discussed that librarians are trained by the American Library Association to overlook child pornography.  Many libraries follow but some do not follow ALA advice and instead preserve evidence and report criminality to the police (link).  Orland Park has the kind of library that follows ALA diktat to the letter, so much so that ALA uses the library's personnel to train other librarians and library trustees how to thwart child porn whistleblowers and cover up evidence, even allowing homophobic statements to be made during that training then rehiring that trainer for the next training (link).

"Children are kept safe, while adults are able to exercise their constitutional right to access information on the Internet without the interference of filters that block legitimate searches":

No.  Children have seen porn on the adult computers and the adults have acted out as a result of the porn and the library has did nothing.  But there is so much more wrong with this statement.

See that "interference of filters that block legitimate searches"?  Diane Jennings leaves out that ALA itself admits library filters work (link) and that the Federal Communications Commission has more recently said library filters are very good and past opposition to them is no longer relevant (link).  So if there's "interference," it's caused by the library itself to fool people into thinking filters don't work, a tried and true trick used in Illinois year after year to defeat library filtering legislation (link).  This is a library that spends huge sums of money on legal fees to silence the child porn whistleblowers then raises taxes to obtain more funding for litigation (link), so certainly they have the wherewithal to get good filters like those the FCC mentioned.

And the claim that people may "exercise their constitutional right to access information on the Internet" as the reason to allow porn, now that's a good one.  Diane Jennings intentionally misleads people on that because the US Supreme Court ruled, twelve years ago now, there is no First Amendment right to porn in public libraries (link).  Porn may be "constitutionally protected material" that one can buy anywhere, but it simply is not protected in public libraries.  Case closed.  So why is Diane Jennings misleading on this?  And since when is porn considered "information"?  Librarians sound like "smut peddlers" when they say porn is "information."  "If this is the hill librarians want to die on while they pretend they're protecting free speech, then so be it" (link).

"The OPPL's award-winning balancing of these interests makes our library both a family- and a user-friendly place":

This statement is really unbelievable, but I have to tell you first some background before you can see just how in your face is this statement.

Yes, the library won awards.  The awards were for protecting "intellectual freedom" by maintaining a policy of allowing access to Internet pornography despite Illinois law (link) and despite the efforts of child porn whistleblowers Megan Fox and Kevin DuJan.  The awards were granted on the recommendation of ALA itself; ALA got the awards granted to the library that it uses as a model library on how to thwart child porn whistleblowing.  One of the awards was granted based on the passing of an anything-goes policy at a hastily arranged public meeting on Lincoln's Birthday: "After two customers voiced opposition to the policy, the Orland Park Library Board of Trustees voted in February 2014 to continue unfiltered Internet access for adults, an action which 'challenges censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment' as stated in the ALA Library Bill of Rights (link)."  The meeting was hastily arranged in that the media and the public were never informed of the meeting in a timely manner.  At the meeting, patient Megan Fox was not allowed to speak in violation of the law; she was rudely waved away and the meeting was adjourned while she was still speaking (link).  The free speech to speak to a public board to oppose its illegal policies is not the kind of free speech the child porn enablers have in mind.

The matter of the multiple violations of the Open Meetings Act was brought before the Illinois Attorney General.  In its defense the library director signed and the library attorney provided a falsified affidavit claiming the public was properly notified of the meeting (link).  The Illinois Attorney General determined that the Orland Park Public Library meeting violated the law and the policy was declared void ab initio (link).  The library board went on to break the law further in a literal crime spree but the Illinois AG ruled that illegal as well (link).  So this "award-winning" library as Diane Jennings puts it got the awards, but consider:

  1. ALA arranged for the library to win the awards to promote its own pro-child porn policy, 
  2. the February 2014 board meeting named in the award was ruled to have occurred illegally and the policy was void ab initio
  3. the library went on a crime spree to force this pro-child porn policy on the community in an illegal fashion and was caught again, although it eventually wore out the system and the policy was imposed and is in place today (link) showing crime does pay,
  4. the public was not allowed to participate in violation of the law, 
  5. the public was not notified of the meeting in violation of the law, and 
  6. the library defended its actions by submitting a falsified affidavit.  

So this "award-winning" library was literally awarded for acting illegally and unethically.  I say again, this "award-winning" library was awarded for breaking the law repeatedly.  That's why this statement of Diane Jennings about "OPPL's award-winning balancing of these interests" is really unbelievable.  It's literally an award-winning, law-breaking library, winning those awards for breaking the law.  Maybe I should give an award to the library too, only I'd call it USA's Most Homophobic and Law Breaking Public Library.

And Kevin DuJan attempted to attend a public meeting at the 2015 ALA Midwinter Conference lauding the library for its award-winning law breaking and silencing of Megan Fox and Kevin DuJan, only to be turned away at the door when the greeter found out it was Kevin DuJan trying to obtain access to a meeting certain to be in part about him.  The Orland Park public paid for its library personnel to attend and speak at that celebratory occasion but the subject of that occasion and library patron Kevin DuJan was persona non grata.  These are the "free speech" and "equal access" people.

"We can continue to rely on the professionalism and common sense":

There is no professionalism nor common sense in allowing and covering up child porn, elected officials calling people "asshole" (link), crowing about awards won for breaking the law, submitting falsified affidavits to the state attorney general in possible violation of attorney ethics, using homophobia to attack child porn whistleblowers, misleading people about library law, lying to the media (link), and constructively discharging sexually harassed employees.  No professionalism nor common sense at all.  None.  Actions speak louder than words.

As to what Kevin DuJan said, it is 100% accurate to the extent I can see, for example I did not count the number of steps.  And this is a real danger: "This is like butterflies being drawn into spiders' webs, because the OPPL has chosen to locate books the teens need for school reports right by the adult computers."  Internet filters are the means to choke off this danger, but this library refuses to do so and, as Diane Jennings illustrates, freely uses flat out false and misleading information and criminality, even homophobia, to keep the public misinformed.

It's only a matter of time before the next criminal incident occurs.

I asked at the beginning of my comments, "Can you see the issues there?"  How about now having read what I wrote and looked at the sources I linked.  Can you see the issues now?

See also:


Here is a substantially similar situation in Canada, where the library claims it's "very child-friendly" but actions speak louder than words:

I left a comment there saying the following:
Right! There's a library I just wrote about that touts its being a "safe library" and that it is very concerned for "child safety." Yet it allows and covers up child pornography and uses repeat criminality and homophobia to defend it, and is given awards by the state library association and a local library school for this criminality, only it's called "intellectual freedom." See:  
"Orland Park Public Library Still Covering Up Child Porn"  
While not connected directly to your situation, there is a hidden link to Canada. The link is this. In that post you can see how the American Library Association pushes child porn on communities by training librarians that they are in no position to determine what is child pornography. Only a court can do that, supposedly. And only on a one-off basis for each of the millions of porn sites. So that's a problem in America.  
The hidden link to Canada? The very same people at ALA pushing the child porn into libraries that I wrote about in the above piece are now providing training to Canadian libraries on how to push child porn into Canada. Look:  
Intellectual Freedom Training Workshops in Toronto  
Barbara Jones, Director, OIF, and Deborah Caldwell-Stone, Deputy Director, OIF, traveled to Toronto, Canada in late February to conduct a series of intellectual freedom training workshops for the staff of the Toronto Public Library (TPL). Approximately 150 staff members turned out to consider and discuss how to manage challenges and the impact of intellectual freedom on collection development policies. Staff response was excellent, and the TPL administration said it is looking forward to inviting OIF staff back to Toronto to conduct further training sessions.


"The OPPL's policies in no way promote the viewing of child pornography. Instead, they expressly state that viewing child pornography or any other illegal material is prohibited. Violations may be reported to the police and subject to criminal prosecution":

Megan Fox alerted me to this.  She says:
Do you see the problems with this?  She says they MAY report child pornography and other illegal activities to the police.  They MAY do that.  Not that they will do that.  They MAY do that. 

That's very important.  It's also sick and wrong.  They SHOULD ALWAYS REPORT THIS TO THE POLICE.  Not that maybe they will do it and maybe they will not.  That's a big problem here.  There should be no question of whether they are going to report the child porn and illegal activity to the police or not.  There should never again be Mary Weimar choosing not to call the police. 

URL of this page:

On Twitter:  @ECWDogs @HillBuzz; @IlAttyGeneral;  +Megan Fox @IntolerantFox; @OIF; @OPPrairie; @OrlandPkLibrary; @VillageOrlandPk