Whistleblower Confirms Library Cover-Up of Child Pornography and Confirms USA PATRIOT Act Used as Excuse

A whistleblower has confirmed a library director has covered up a child pornography incident. Further, she confirmed the USA PATRIOT Act was used as the excuse for the coverup. Watch the video and read the story here: "Allegations of a Child Porn Cover Up at Local Library," by Matthew Campbell, CBS 3, 2 July 2009.

An assistant librarian blew the whistle on a patron who is accused of downloading child porn. But she didn't stop there. She speaks out against the higher-ups who, she says, tried to sweep the incident under the rug.
....
Assistant Library Director, Carla Wessels, alleges her boss tried to delete the images and keep the incident quiet, by not reporting it.
"She kept saying over and over, the police are going to want to know a name. And she told me to just relax," Wessels says.
....
And that's when she decided to blow the whistle. It was 3 days later on a Monday morning.
"First thing when I got in, in the morning, I went into her office, and said pretty much the same thing when I called her Friday night. And she gave me the same response that the police are going to want to know a name and she even brought up the Patriot Act saying that as a library, we need to keep patrons names and addresses confidential," Wessels says.
Fearing the incident would never be reported, Wessels called police. Holyoke's Cyber Crimes unit seized the computer.
Hours later, the images Maria deleted were resurrected. The photos were brought back to life and the man who allegedly surfed for them was identified.
....
"What about the allegations that you told the librarians not to do anything about it," we asked.
"That's what they're saying, I'm not going to say either way," Pagan says.
The Library Director still would not admit timing was an issue.
"The police was called, right," Pagan says. "The person was caught, so time doesn't matter," she states.
But Police Chief Anthony Scott says timing is everything.
"If they deleted files, it would've caused problems, but because of the actions of the assistant librarian, we were able to get the info and secure the computer," Scott says.
....
Our investigation discovered no changes at the library. Sex offender posters are not put up. There are no new firewalls in the library computers, nor are there any new policies for dealing with illegal activities.

Remarkably, I predicted both. See, emphasis in original:

• "Library Delays Child Porn Incident Report; Holyoke Public Library Director Maria G Pagan Lies to Hide the Truth From the Public," 16 June 2009:

"Citizens of Holyoke need to ask whether the library director is violating the public trust by looking the other way at criminal activity in the public library. That seems to be the case, at least as I understand what was reported."

• "Child Porn Trafficking in Public Libraries; Libraries Actively Thwart Child Porn Investigations," 24 June 2009:

"[I]t seems unavoidable to conclude that libraries actively thwart child porn investigations. And it seems this is motivated by the ALA's negative reaction to Bush Administration initiatives to keep Americans safe from terrorists!"

How much longer will Holyoke allow an apparent law breaker to run the library? Isn't there enough evidence to have Holyoke Public Library Director Maria Pagan arrested as an accessory to the crime of child pornography? Did you watch the video and see her continue her cover-up? At least that's my opinion.

Is opposition to the USA PATRIOT Act really a reason to allow child porn viewers to get off scot free? Is that what the community wants, or is that the American Library Association's radical agenda being quietly forced on local communities?

When will communities wake up? Wake up!

UPDATE 21 JULY 2009: Apparently, this community woke up a little. See "Holyoke Library Installs Anti-Porn Software in Wake of Michael Houle's Recent Arrest," by Mike Plaisance, The Republican Newsroom, 20 July 2009. Notice the story of the librarian's outing of the library director's actions to protect the child porn viewer is further expanded.

.

Child Porn Trafficking in Public Libraries; Libraries Actively Thwart Child Porn Investigations

Dr. Frank Kardasz has exposed child pornography trafficking in public libraries. He provides "examples of some sad incidents from various locations throughout the United States." See "Internet Crimes Against Children - Libraries," by Frank Kardasz, Ed.D., Dr. Frank Kardasz (Ed.D.), 3 February 2008.

And look at this—libraries actively thwart child pornography investigations:

3. In July 2007 a Colorado Internet crimes against children investigator reported that Denver Public Libraries destroy data after each patron logs off of the libraries computers. Investigators are unable to obtain any information about library computer users. In the past year, three child pornography cases have been unresolved due to lack of information. Arizona investigators report the same situation at Phoenix Public Libraries. Child pornography incidents that have been traced to public libraries are often unresolved because libraries do not enable simple logging features that retain basic information about computer users.

Source: "Ongoing Survey of Law Enforcement re: ISP's Responses to Subpoena and Search Warrant Requests," by Frank Kardasz, Ed.D., Dr. Frank Kardasz (Ed.D.), 12 February 2008.

Did you get that? "Child pornography incidents that have been traced to public libraries are often unresolved because libraries do not enable simple logging features that retain basic information about computer users."

What might be the reason libraries do that?

Here's how the American Library Association [ALA] guides libraries—basically telling them to avoid creating or to destroy the very records Dr. Kardasz described above:

Avoid creating unnecessary records. Only record a user’s personally identifiable information when necessary for the efficient operation of the library.

Avoid retaining records that are not needed for efficient operation of the library. Check with your local governing body to learn if there are laws or policies addressing record retention and in conformity with these laws or policies, develop policies on the length of time necessary to retain a record. Ensure that all kinds and types of records are covered by the policy, including data-related logs, digital records, and system backups.

Once record retention policies are in place, ensure that records are destroyed or archived on schedule. A library cannot destroy records after it receives notice from law enforcement agents that the records may be subject to judicial process.

Be aware of library practices and procedures that place information on public view; for example, the use of postcards for overdue notices or requested materials, staff terminals placed so that the screens can be read by the public, sign-in sheets to use computers or other devices, and the provision of titles of reserve requests or interlibrary loans provided over the telephone to users’ family members or answering machines.

Remember that there is no affirmative duty to collect or retain information about library patrons on behalf of law enforcement.

Source: "Confidentiality and Coping with Law Enforcement Inquiries: Guidelines for the Library and its Staff," by ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library Association, April 2004.

Given the above, it seems unavoidable to conclude that libraries actively thwart child porn investigations.

And it seems this is motivated by the ALA's negative reaction to Bush Administration initiatives to keep Americans safe from terrorists!

Increased visits to libraries by law enforcement agents, including FBI agents and officers of state, county, and municipal police departments, are raising considerable concern among the public and the library community. These visits are not only a result of the increased surveillance and investigation prompted by the events of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent passage of the USA Patriot Act, but also as a result of law enforcement officers investigating computer crimes, including e-mail threats and possible violations of the laws addressing online obscenity and child pornography.

Don't communities want officers investigating online obscenity and child pornography? Or terrorism? Who is the ALA that it decides to oppose that, then guide local libraries on how to oppose it? Exactly why do people think ALA policy should control local libraries?

One more for good measure: "Ten Year Sentence for Phoenix Library Child Pornography Trafficker," by Frank Kardasz, Ed.D., Dr. Frank Kardasz (Ed.D.), 3 February 2008.

Apparently, we have the ALA to thank for this: "The library did not require users to provide any proof of identity in order to use the computers and investigators later learned that the computers have software set to eliminate evidence shortly after a patron departs."

I wonder who set the software like that and why? Shouldn't the ALA be at least partly responsible for the consequences? For the child victims? Is there no one willing to sue the ALA for the consequences of the radical policies it forces into local communities? I think thwarting law enforcement to spite the Bush administration and in a manner that endangers children and citizens generally is radical, don't you? See my other blog posts about libraries and child pornography.

Does your local community public library have a similar policy, and is that what the community really wants?

.