Yeah Right, Chicago Public Library

Chicago Public Library allows unlimited child pornography viewing along with "legal" pornography viewing (both of which under Illinois law is illegal in Illinois libraries), and media cover it up, as I have previously reported. But it has policy stating patrons may not, "View child pornography as it is illegal and subject to federal and state prosecution."

Yeah right.  Just useless signs, purely designed to mislead people:

Chicago Public Library - Guidelines Governing Use of the Library

"View child pornography as it is illegal and subject to federal and state prosecution."

If you are the rare librarian willing to stop child porn viewing, then see:

• "Plan to Report Child Pornography in Public Libraries"

—

URL of this page:
safelibraries.blogspot.com/2016/11/yeah-right-chicago-public-library.html

On Twitter: 
@ChiPubLib

Follow @SafeLibraries

Child Porn in Libraries Due to American Library Association Facilitation; Another Library Breaks the Law

The American Library Association [ALA] provides libraries with a model Internet Use Policy that facilitates child pornography viewing by advising librarians only judges can determine what is child pornography, not librarians, so do not help the police [EN 1].  ALA advice is followed by law firms that advise libraries not to report child pornography viewers to the police because that would violate the child porn viewers right to privacy [EN 2].  Law enforcement entities have noted ALA policy essentially aids and abets child porn crimes in public libraries [EN 3].

Many libraries follow ALA advice and, among other things, essentially end up defrauding the E-rate program that is funded by the "Universal Service Charge" that appears on all our telephone and Internet bills [EN 4].

A New Jersey library even set policy, following ALA guidance, ensuring children in the children's section of the library retain unfiltered access to the Internet despite an 11 year old boy viewing porn there [EN 5].

An Illinois library caught covering up child porn crimes was awarded for passing an ALA-like policy protecting child pornography viewing where the policy was passed during the Lincoln's Birthday holiday, a move ruled illegal by the Illinois Attorney General.  But that didn't stop ALA's wish to hold the library's policy up as a model for other libraries.  Hence, the library was literally awarded for breaking the law to facilitate child pornography viewing on the Internet [EN 6].

Not All Libraries Follow ALA's Child Porn Facilitation Advice

Fortunately, not all libraries follow ALA's advice to allow child porn viewing.  One Massachusetts library decided to preserve the evidence and call the police on a child porn viewer despite ALA procedures in place to hide the crime [EN 7].   Libraries that preserve evidence and help police apprehend child porn criminals never receive ALA awards of any kind; they do not even get covered in library media like Library Journal or ALA's own American Libraries.

Timberland Regional Library Is the Latest to Facilitate Child Porn

Unfortunately, the latest such library to be caught facilitating child pornography and breaking the law is the Timberland Regional Library, Tumwater, WA:

• "Winlock Man Held on $100,000 Bail After Arrest for Child Pornography; Jailed: FBI Investigation Finds That Donald Lee Schnacker Used Cellphone App, Library Internet to Access and Trade Images," by Natalie Johnson, The Chronicle (Greater Lewis County, WA), 24 December 2015:

A Winlock man was arrested Tuesday after an FBI investigation revealed that he was allegedly using a social networking site and public library Internet service to send and receive child pornography.
....
Superior Court Judge Nelson Hunt ordered Schnacker held on $100,000 bail.  "This is clearly a community safety issue," he said. 

Hunt said he was particularly concerned about the allegation that Schnacker had used public Wi-Fi to access the images.
....
Further investigation showed that Schnacker accessed his Kik account from an IP address assigned to the Timberland Regional Library.
....

So the library's Wi-Fi was used for child porn trafficking.

Library Partly Responsible for Child Porn Trafficking; Defrauds CIPA

Turns out the library may be partly responsible.  Why?  It follows ALA guidelines that facilitate child porn and defrauds the E-rate program as a result.  The library is literally breaking the law to facilitate access to child pornography.

Here's the proof.  To collect E-rate funding for "Internet Access" under the Children's Internet Protection Act [CIPA], libraries must follow certain procedures to block images of Internet pornography, for example, requiring patrons to ask for Internet filters to be disabled if needed [EN 8]. In violation of that law, the library policy advises that the library "allows adults to turn off filters without staff intervention. [EN 9]"  That violates CIPA.  Yet the library still obtained E-rate funding for "Internet Access" in violation of the law.  Someone had to certify that the library was in compliance with the law when it is clearly stated in policy that it cannot not be.  In 2013, the library obtained $14,616 in E-rate funds for "Internet Access" in violation of the law [EN 10].  Same for $12,600 in 2014 and $29,400 in 2015.  That totals $56,616 in fraud.

Is it fair to send a man to jail for using an attractive nuisance created by the library in breaking the law and not stopped by the municipality that failed to stop the library from breaking the law?  If he goes to jail, is it fair that the library gets away with it and continues to violate the law, facilitate child pornography crimes, and defraud the federal government while doing so?  Will sending him to jail stop this from happening again in a case such as this where the library facilitates a crime and the municipality lets it go on?

Today is Christmas

Today is Christmas.  It is a day libraries are closed nationwide.  On the few days libraries are closed nationwide, those are the few days libraries are not facilitating child pornography by following ALA guidance.

This Timberland Regional Library matter reported yesterday is just the latest instance.  Had the library followed the law [EN 11] instead of ALA guidance [EN 1], chances are the trafficking of child pornography might never have happened in the first place.  In other words, defense attorneys ought to consider whether 1) public libraries following ALA guidelines, 2) the municipalities that let them get away with lawlessness [EN 11], and 3) perhaps ALA itself are partially at fault.

The Law Should Hold Sway In a Public Library, Not ALA Guidance

The moment people realize the law should hold sway in a public library, not ALA guidance, that's the day ALA loses its ability to facilitate child pornography in public libraries nationwide.

Killing the ghost of the ALA that facilitates child porn in libraries:
"The Ghost of Judith Krug Continues to Haunt America's Libraries Today"

Endnotes

[EN 1] "Guidelines and Considerations for Developing a Public Library Internet Use Policy," by Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library Association, 26 March 2013, emphasis in original:

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.

[EN 2] "A Patron is Viewing What Appears to be Child Pornography On a Library Computer; What Should be Done?," by Klein, Thorpe and Jenkins, LTD, Library Law, 27 April 2011:

Accordingly, even if the library employs a computer technician who could demonstrate that the patron was viewing child pornography on the computer, this is not a reportable criminal offense, the library's computer technician is not under any statutory reporting obligation, and the Library's Records Confidentiality Act may be violated if such a report is made. 

[EN 3] "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.

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.

See also: "Child Porn Trafficking in Public Libraries; Libraries Actively Thwart Child Porn Investigations," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 24 June 2009.

And see: "School Library Child Porn Arrest Story by Associated Press Features Police Expert Dr. Frank Kardasz, Thanks to SafeLibraries," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 10 March 2013, quoting from source:

Frank Kardasz, retired commander of the Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, said his task force worked dozens of cases involving people viewing or trafficking child pornography while using public and college library computers.  

The problem is tough to police because of the imperfect nature of Internet filtering devices and pushback from free-speech advocates who believe adults should have the right to view adult pornography in libraries, he said, adding that any place offering wireless Internet connections "is an opportunity for child pornography offenders to traffic contraband images."  

"My experience is that some, not all, libraries underreport the offenses because they do not wish to bring attention nor police involvement to their facility," said Kardasz, founder and director of the Phoenix-based Cyberspace Child Protection Campaign. "Also, because many offenders are nefarious enough to avoid apprehension, there are probably more offenses occurring than we are aware of."

[EN 4] "In the Matter of Modernizing the E-rate Program for Schools and Libraries, WC Docket No. 13-184," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 16 September 2013.

[EN 5] "Library Approves Unfiltered Computers in Children's Section," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 21 November 2015, quoting the Westfield Memorial Library Board of Trustees:

The Special Ad-Hoc Committee to Examine the use of Filtering Computers in the Children's Section of the Westfield Memorial Library recommends no additional changes at this time.  The committee further recommends that if additional Internet accessible computers are added to the Children's Section that a 50% ratio of filtered and non-filtered computers be maintained.

[EN 6] "Orland Park Public Library Still Covering Up Child Porn," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 21 November 2015.

[EN 7] "Commonwealth v Crayton: Librarians Report Child Porn and Preserve Computer Evidence for Police," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 28 December 2014, regarding the Cambridge Public Library, Cambridge, MA.

[EN 8] United States v. American Library Association, 539 US 194 (2003).

[EN 9] "Compliance Measures for Children's Internet Protection Act and Neighborhood Children's Internet Protection Act," by Timberland Regional Library Board of Trustees, Timberland Regional Library, 18 February 2004.

[EN 10] "Search Commitments," by Schools and Libraries (E-rate), Universal Service Administrative Company, undated.

[EN 11] Existing state laws have language in place the precludes porn in public libraries.  ALA never, ever reports this as it would completely and instantly destroy its ability to facilitate child pornography in public libraries.  For example, in Washington, the home state of the Timberland Regional Library that facilitates child porn trafficking as seen in The Chronicle story, RCW 27.12.210 states that library boards of trustees may only do "acts necessary for the orderly and efficient management and control of the library."  According to the US Supreme Court case US v. ALA [EN 8], pornography has traditionally been blocked from public libraries.  So pornography is obviously not "necessary for the orderly and efficient management and control of the library."  The municipality should act to force the library to comply with the law and can do so without piercing the library's veil of autonomy to act within the law.  To the extent municipalities fail to stop ultra vires actions of libraries such as by facilitating child pornography in violation of the law, municipalities may and should become a target for defense attorneys in addition to libraries.

URL of this page: safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/12/ALA.html

On Twitter:  @ALALibrary @Chronline @FBI @FCC @OIF @TRLDistrict

Follow @SafeLibraries

Magnet Libraries

Criminals know to seek out and use public libraries having weak or nonexistent library porn filters.  Below is an example.  And the evidence comes right from the mouth of the criminal.  So if your library allows porn despite policy and the law, your library is a magnet for criminals.

Notice the library's Internet use policy states it provides Internet filters, blocks porn in accordance with law, and adheres to the Children's Internet Protection Act, but it is completely useless, as all "acceptable use policies" are.  It is apparently just for show because it looks really good but it obviously does not work.  The Maricopa County Superior Court judge and relevant legal counsel ought to consider if the library is itself partly responsible for providing an attractive nuisance:

• "Acceptable Use of Electronic Resources," by Scottsdale Public Library, Scottsdale, AZ (hyperlinks in original):

  4.  The Library provides filtered access to the Internet in order to adhere to the requirements set forth in Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS 13-3501 “Obscenity, Definitions”, 13-3506.01 “Furnishing Harmful Items to Minors, Internet Activity”, 13-3507 “Public Display of Explicit Sexual Material”) and the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA). Because filtering software is inherently imperfect, we cannot guarantee that all Internet content will be appropriately filtered at all times.
  
  5.  Adult customers may request unfiltered Internet access at any time without having to provide an explanation to library staff. Disabling of the Internet filter by Library staff in no way exempts the customer from ARS 13-3507 “Public Display of Explicit Sexual Material.”

Ever heard of magnet schools?  Well Scottsdale Public Library is a magnet library.  Does your community have a magnet library like this one?

---

• "PD: Gilbert School Bus Driver Downloaded Child Porn at Library," by Phil Benson, CBS 5 (KPHO), 5 June 2014 (emphasis added, hyperlink in original):

SCOTTSDALE, AZ (CBS5) -

A man awaiting trial on child sex crimes was arrested at his Gilbert home Tuesday on allegations of downloading hundreds of images of child porn at a Scottsdale library, police said.

Murat Alev, 60, was wearing a court-ordered ankle monitoring device that enabled Maricopa County adult probation officers to track him down at Mustang Library at 10101 N. 90th St.

Alev was a school bus driver for the Gilbert school system at the time of his arrest, according to a probable cause statement.

Alev handed over a thumb drive that he admitted contained hundreds of images he downloaded of young naked girls while on the library computer, a court document stated.

Court paperwork stated Alev had been at the library for six hours.

Alev told a Scottsdale police detective that he was at Mustang Library because its computers "don't filter as well as other libraries," according to the probable cause statement.

The man is currently on felony release pretrial services for furnishing obscene materials to minors. As part of his release conditions, he is not allowed to access computers or the internet.

Scottsdale police detectives arrested Alev after a Maricopa County Superior Court judge granted a warrant.

Authorities said examining the thumb drive and said future charges are possible.

Copyright 2014 CBS 5 (KPHO Broadcasting Corporation). All rights reserved.

URL of this page:  safelibraries.blogspot.com/2014/06/MagnetLibraries.html

On Twitter:  @CBS5AZ @CourtPIO @ScottsdaleAZGov @ScottsdalePD @ScottsdaleReads 

Follow @SafeLibraries

Banned From All Libraries on Earth for Masturbating in Racine Public Library That Allows Unfiltered Internet Access; Law School Exam Question on First Amendment and Criminal Law in Public Libraries

A man has been banned from "all the libraries on the face of the Earth" for public library masturbation:

• "Man Forbidden From 'All Libraries on the Face of the Earth,'" by Stephanie Jones, The Journal Times (Racine, WI), 14 March 2013.
• "Wisconsin Man Banned From 'All the Libraries on the Face of the Earth' As Condition of $1,000 Bond; Tyree S. Carter is Accused of Openly Masturbating in the Racine Public Library Last Week; A Witness Told Investigators Carter Was Out in the Open, Not Trying to Conceal His Act," by The Associated Press, New York Daily News, 15 March 2013.

Pretend this is a constitutional/criminal law school exam (perfect for the University of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Library & Information Studies).  When answering law school exams, one uses IRAC, Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion.  In this exam question, I'll raise some issues and some rules I think are present.  Can anyone find others?  The media did not state whether the masturbator viewed online porn in the library, but, for this hypothetical law exam question, let's assume he did as that is the consistent precursor to public library masturbation, something so common reporter Carl Monday filmed a man masturbating in a public library, right next to the children's room.  You have four hours to answer and may refer to the linked reliable sources of information, or others, as long as you provide URLs for me to check.

SafeLibraries School of Law

Constitutional/Criminal Law Final Exam

FACTS:

The Racine Public Library, Racine, WI, allows unfiltered Internet access under its "Internet Access Acceptable Use Policy," and its "Rules and Regulations Governing Use of the Internet Workstations" say, "Users should not send, receive, or display text or graphics which may be reasonably construed as obscene by community standards."  The acceptable use policy clarifies that when it comes to obscenity, "That determination is made through legislation and interpreted by the courts."  The Racine Public Library Board of Trustees has created a legal disclaimer stating, "Neither the Racine Public Library nor the City of Racine, its officers, directors, or employees shall be liable for any damages (direct or consequential), including lost profits, for any information obtained or provided on the Internet."

A man views pornography on the unfiltered Internet computers provided by the public library in full view of all employees and patrons, including children, then he openly masturbates.  He is arrested and removed. 

The library has seen persistent problems.  Consider this from 24 September 2005 Journal Sentinel (Milwaukee, WI): "Father Wants to Make Sure Porn Can't Be Seen at Library; Panel Creating Proposal on Teens' Computer Use":

The Racine Public Library is hosting a public forum to discuss its Internet Acceptable Use Policy, a discussion that comes on the heels of a citizen's complaint about teens using public computers to access adult Web sites.  ....  Java Orr of Racine became concerned when he was at the library several months ago with his 6-year-old daughter and he saw a male teenager downloading and viewing pornographic material on a computer in the adult services area.  Orr said when he brought his complaint to library officials, he was told nothing could be done to prevent the youth from viewing the material.  Orr took his fight to keep children from viewing pornographic material at the Racine Public Library to the public.  He spent hours in front of the library petitioning residents to sign his Child Friendly Library Act, which he intends to get the Legislature to pass a bill on.  So far he has more than 500 signatures on the petitions.  His goal is 1,000.  "The bill would prevent children, including young adults, from gaining access to obscene or pornographic material," Orr said.  ....  "I'm hoping to hear what the public wants," [Racine Public Library Director Jessica] MacPhail said.

Or this in the same media source dated 30 July 2005 and entitled, "Porn Access at Public Library Criticized; Dad Wants Material Kept from Youths":

After observing what he calls pornographic material being downloaded and viewed by a teenager at a public library, a Racine man is now on a mission to change the law.  Java Orr said in an interview last week that while visiting the Racine Public Library three weeks ago with his 6-year-old daughter, he observed a male teenager downloading and viewing pornographic material on a computer in the adult services area.  Orr said that when he brought his complaint to library officials, they said nothing could be done to prevent the youth from viewing the material.  "It's insane that kids can actually see and read about this kind of sexual material at a public library," Orr said.  "Furthermore, that my child or any other child can easily walk by and witness it."  Orr is taking his fight to keep children from viewing pornographic material at the Racine Public library to the public.  In the past week, Orr has spent hours in front of the library petitioning residents to sign his Child Friendly Library Act, which he hopes will get attention from the Legislature.  He has gathered more than 500 signatures and has set a goal of 1,000.  "The bill would prevent children, including young adults, from gaining access to obscene or pornographic material" at a public library, Orr said.  ....  [Racine Public Library Director Jessica] MacPhail said a separate youth services area in the library provides five computers equipped with filters to weed out such material.  She said that area is used primarily for children through eighth grade.  ....  MacPhail said the Racine Public Library does post its Internet access policies for the public.  The policies state ... it is unacceptable to use the library's Internet equipment to send, receive or display text or graphics that may reasonably be construed as obscene by community standards.

LAW:

Federal:  Internet filters are legal in public libraries since US v. American Library Association, 539 U.S. 194 (2003).  Legal porn may be legally removed from public libraries as there is no First Amendment right to view porn in public libraries.

State:  See Wisconsin Library Law, Chapter 43.  Wisconsin criminal code includes "948.10 Exposing genitals or pubic area" and "948.11 Exposing a child to harmful material or harmful descriptions or narrations," including "(4) Libraries and educational institutions."  Consider if other Wisconsin Criminal Code provisions apply.  Also consider cases such as Adamson v. Minneapolis Public Library and other library hostile environment or sexual harassment lawsuits.  Locally, consider Jackson v. County of Racine.

Local:  Consider also Racine Municipal Code, including "Sec. 66-1001. - Public nuisance prohibited."  And might there be any ordinances regarding officials failing to act in the public trust?  Any legal instrument on the statutory creation of the Wisconsin public library and whether pornography is allowable as "free access to information and diversity of ideas"?  Consider searching Google for "annoyed librarian porn ala."

QUESTIONS:

Is there a crime or other legally actionable activity or lack thereof?  What?  Who is liable?  For what?  Have the patrons been harmed?  Children?  Library employees?  What about the perpetrator?  Was there an attractive nuisance?  Might the crime not have happened in the first place had effective filters been in place?

And the code that created the library.  Did it allow for pornography?  Has the library acted outside the law by acting as an open public forum and allowing porn instead of as a quasi public forum and filtering out porn per US v. ALA? 

What are the duties of the municipality when a library acts outside the law, and what are the liabilities for failure to require a library to act within the law?  Is the municipality liable for anything?  What?  Does the library's legal disclaimer protect the municipality? 

What effect might there be as a result of the knowledge of persistent problems in the library occurring as a result of pornography?

If libraries and educational institutions are exempted from liability for "carry[ing] out the essential purpose of making available to all citizens a current, balanced collection of books, reference materials, periodicals, sound recordings and audiovisual materials that reflect the cultural diversity and pluralistic nature of American society," does that protection extend to pornography displayed publicly as a result of the lack of Internet filters?  Does pornography "reflect the cultural diversity and pluralistic nature of American society" to the extent that it should be allowed in libraries even when the US Supreme Court said it may be legally blocked from libraries?

Library policy states, "Websites may be brought to the Library's attention; however, staff will not review sites if viewing the content would violate the City's Anti-Harassment Policy." What might that mean?  What relevance might that have?  And the library's "Acceptable Use Policy", what effect has that had in fact and might it have in law? 

If the library policy is to exclude obscene material, but also to claim the decisions as to what is obscene "is made through legislation and interpreted by the courts," what effect might that have in fact and on any legal proceedings?  Has the library covered itself from liability?  With millions of pornographic web sites and the library's requirement that only a court can determine what is obscene, has the library set up an impossibility that effectively nullifies its claim to preclude obscenity by policy?  If the library, in setting up such an impossibility, is following the requirements of an out of state organization, has it effectively ceded control of the central policy of the library to that outside organization?  When answering, consider the American Library Association's guidance to public libraries entitled, "Guidelines and Considerations for Developing a Public Library Internet Use Policy":

Knowing what materials are actually obscenity or child pornography is difficult, as is knowing, when minors are involved, and what materials are actually "harmful to minors." The applicable statutes and laws, together with the written decisions of courts that have applied them in actual cases, are the only official guides.  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."

Lastly, what might be the implications and effect of the library's legal disclaimer?

ANSWER:

[Insert answer here or in comments below.  You have four hours.]

URL of this page:  safelibraries.blogspot.com/2013/03/LawSchoolExamQuestion.html

Follow @SafeLibraries

Blatant CIPA Fraud in Pierce County Library in Policy and Practice Caught On Video

The Pierce County Library, Tacoma, WA, is blatantly defrauding the federal government of funds meant for libraries compliant with the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA).  It has essentially stolen $462,789.73 from the federal government.  I predict it will continue to steal until forced to stop as the fraud has been continuous for eight years so far.

It is committing this fraud in policy and practice.  The policy goes directly counter to the law, and the practice is evident from open pornography viewing.

The law, CIPA, was found constitutional in 2003.  US v. American Library Association, 539 U.S. 194 (2003) held, "public libraries' use of Internet filtering software does not violate their patrons' First Amendment rights...."  Simple, right?  Now look at Pierce County Library's "Internet Use Policy" that says essentially the exact opposite:

But the Pierce County Library System Board of Trustees considers that all materials selected or accessed by adults are protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution until such time as they are determined unprotected by judicial action.  Consequently, except as set forth in this Policy, the Library System does not monitor, filter or endorse materials on the Internet.

To obtain funding under CIPA, a library must filter the Internet a certain way.  One can plainly see the library refuses to filter the Internet at all, not in any way.  At least in policy.  Now let's look at practice.

In practice, open porn viewing, such as in the Steilacoom Library, Steilacoom, WA, which is part of the Pierce County Library, is clearly evident in the below video.  The library apparently has no Internet filtering, just like its policy stated.  If you do not want to see pornography, do not watch the following video of a man sitting right out in the open of a public library and watching porn as other library patrons go about their business, except for the guy filming this, and thanks to him we get to see the, um, action, and quite clearly:

Oh yes, the library later claims in its policy to be CIPA compliant:  "Consequently, the Pierce County Library System's computers that have access to the Internet will be filtered to the extent required by CIPA, but that persons 17 years of age or older will have the right to remove that filter for their use."  But CIPA requires the library or a librarian to remove the filter, not the patrons themselves.  So in yet another way, and again in writing, the library is evidencing that it is failing to be CIPA compliant.

As to the amount of CIPA fraud, that's $462,789.73.  Anyone can see this for themselves by searching open public records of CIPA funding for "Internet Access" (as opposed to "Telcomm") and aggregating the amounts obtained from 2004 to the present (2012).  Since CIPA was found constitutional by the US Supreme Court in 2003 and for related reasons, 2004 is the relevant date to begin finding fraud.  Search for Pierce County Library in the state of Washington here: http://www.usac.org/sl/tools/commitments-search/

I will be reporting this fraud here:  "Submit a Whistleblower Alert."  Among other things, I will be submitting the URL to this blog post as it contains or links to relevant evidence:

• http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2012/11/BlatantCipaFraud.html 

To commit this fraud people had to sign a certification to the federal government that the library was entitled to the funds, and they had to have done so knowing the library does not filter but the law requires it to do so.  Those people have committed fraud, perhaps dereliction of duty, perhaps a violation fo the public trust, and should be fired immediately.  If I were part of the local media, I would file FOIA requests with the library and with the Federal Communications Commission responsible for CIPA to find out the names.  Just because a public library or librarian is involved does not mitigate the offense.

The local government is hereby put on notice of this fraud and the potential for resultant harm.  If the pornography viewing intended to be stopped by CIPA results in any crimes or misdemeanors against librarians or patrons, the government can and should be sued for failure to stop the library, a governmental entity, from acting outside the law.

Mind you, this is in the state where Dean Marney successfully won state and federal Internal filtering cases recently by pointing out the false "dogma" of the American Library Association, yet the Pierce County Library is aware of this but continues to mislead the public.

So the evidence for fraud comes from at least three sources:

1. The video shown above entitled, "OLD GUY WATCHES PORN IN PUBLIC LIBRARY," by Kevin Chacon, YouTube, 21 November 2012, and related communications on Twitter such as here, here, and here.
2. The library's Internet Use Policy containing language that is factually and legally false.
3. The publicly available records of $462,789.73 fraudulently obtained under the CIPA program.

The question is, will the library continue to commit this fraud?  Will the government require the library to comply with the law to minimize its own liability, let alone apply old fashioned honesty?  Will the media report accurately about this fraud?

The library's policy states:

Although the Library has adopted these policies, it disclaims any warranties on the effectiveness of any filter and disclaims any liabilities if the filter is inadvertently not implemented upon request.  The Library further assumes no responsibility for damages, direct or indirect, arising from any use of the Library's connections to the Internet.

Nice try.  The library cannot claim protection under the law relating to the Internet while it is violating the law relating to the Internet.

Any library crime victims and perpetrators, feel free to contact me for assistance in taking legal action against the library, the people who acted fraudulently, and the government that allowed the library to act outside the law, especially now that the library is on notice of this fraud.


NOTE ADDED 24 NOVEMBER 2012:

The library has been in contact with me and is being very forthcoming in offering to provide the CIPA certifications.  Hopefully more good news to come.


NOTE ADDED 27 NOVEMBER 2012:

I have today reported this library to the Whistleblower Alert line, 888-203-8100, option 9, during working hours.  (During non-working hours option 9 was not available, and the online means had a technical failure last I tried.)  The evidence I provided is fully contained in the above post and added note.  I confirmed the receptionist was able to see this post.

Past experience tells me I will never again hear from the FCC about this matter, nor will I ever learn what action, if any, has been taken, even if I were to ask.  I have reported about four libraries in the past, some cases of which are reported on this blog.  From what I can tell, the fraud in those libraries continues unabated.

I was asked if I was "just a concerned citizen."  I do not know how that is relevant or why it was qualified as "just" a "concerned citizen."  Perhaps my being "just a concerned citizen" has to do with why it appears my whistleblower alerts seem to have gone nowhere?

Be that as it may, I see that the investigation, at least of my own post on this matter, has already begun.  I am getting multiple visits to my blog from Irvington, NJ, including a search for "safe libraries blogspot," which I discussed with the receptionist, and links being followed, including to the original one containing the video by @kevinNYCdipped.  So I am satisfied at least someone is looking at the evidence.



NOTE ADDED 17 FEBRUARY 2013:

• "IMLS: Don't Award Fraud in Public Libraries," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 17 February 2013.

Follow @SafeLibraries

Library Board Thanked for Blocking Porn With Internet Filters

Al Maghnieh

The Windsor Public Library board of directors, Windsor, ON, gets thanked repeatedly for finally installing Internet filters to block Internet pornography from the public library:

• "Porn Banned at Windsor Libraries; Online Gambling Access Also Banned," by CBC News, CBC News, 28 October 2011:

It's now official.  The Windsor Public Library board of directors has passed the necessary policy to block online porn and gambling on library computers. 

Councillor Al Maghnieh chairs the library board of directors and said the policy makes sense. 

"This is a place family, seniors and kids use.  We're encouraging teen zones and after school activities.  It's just not the type of stuff we want in this place," Maghnieh said.  "This is a place for social literacy, advancing yourself and being part of the community." 

Maghnieh says he has heard from library users thanking him for taking action against porn websites.

Common sense, no?

This is another example of community standards, namely, that communities want public libraries to block porn.  That's why the people recognize how lucky they are to have a library board that sets aside the usual "intellectual freedom" dogma, as evidenced by their taking time to thank the library board for blocking porn.

And it shows the library's "Acceptable Use Policy," which is typical, does not work, or else there would be no need for filters to block porn.  I bet that policy will be amended soon.

Will your library board install filters to block porn?  Contact me if you wish help making it happen.  And don't fall for the "privacy screen" excuse.  Remember, the community loves when the public libraries blocks porn, as this example shows:

• "Public Breaks Into Applause for Library Board that Unanimously Voted for Internet Filters to Stop Porn Viewing in Public Library," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 15 November 2009.

See also:

• "Library Porn Removal Roadmap; NCRL Director Dean Marney Details How to Legally Remove Legal Porn from Public Library Computers and Advises that the ALA Relies on Outdated Dogma," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 15 November 2010.

Pornography conference blasted as 'meat market' by protesters
http://gu.com/p/326vb/tw

NOTE ADDED 10 NOVEMBER 2011:

The following is relevant, even directly addressing this Windsor matter:

• "The Great Canadian Porn Debate," by Annoyed Librarian, Library Journal, 7 November 2011.

Follow @SafeLibraries