home

Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers

By Jeralyn, Section War on Terror
Posted on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 11:43:05 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Three cheers for the little guy. In this case, Brandeis University library director Kathy Glick-Weil, who refused to turn over 30 computers to the FBI because they didn't have a warrant. And the mayor, who backed her up.

Federal Bureau of Investigation agents tried to seize 30 of the library's computers without a warrant, saying someone had used the library's Internet connection to send the threat to Brandeis.

After the refusal, the FBI did what they should have done in the first instance: they went to a judge and got a warrant.

[hat tip Patriot Daily.]

< Brokeback Mountain Leads Oscar Nominations | Sign Up for the No-Spy List >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers | 27 comments (27 topical)
    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#1)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 12:02:17 PM EST
    Kathy Glick-Weil for President!!

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#2)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 12:47:02 PM EST
    The latest addition to my hero list. Thank you Ms. Glick-Weil, it's good to know some of us know what it means to be a real American.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#3)
    by Lis Riba on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:01:49 PM EST
    That's the City of Newton's librarian you should be praising. It was alleged that threats against Brandeis were made from computers in the Newton library and it was Newton's librarian who stood up to the search. FYI.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#4)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:06:01 PM EST
    But while they were waiting for the warrant they allowed the FBI to examine the computers, which is what they wanted to do in the first place. So what was accomplished? Nice to see public employees protecting criminals.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:12:59 PM EST
    Nice to see public employees protecting criminals
    The way I see it, this public employee spoke out in defense of our way of life.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#6)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:18:28 PM EST
    You are right Patrick. Warrants are completely overrated and outdated, we should get rid of them and allow police to search anyone, any where, any time.
    Nice to see public employees protecting criminals.


    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#7)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:21:58 PM EST
    How's that Kdog? She has no duty to protect the criminal. That's not our way of life is it? Does a criminal who uses public computers as an instrument of that crime have a "reasonable" expectation of privacy in their contents? Now, I wasn't there and I don't know her reasons for refusing to consent, or even if she had standing to consent, but if she did it just to be obstructionist, then I have a problem with her decision.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#8)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:23:40 PM EST
    JL, Never said that, did I? But someone has the right to consent to a search don't they? Without a warrant. Do you suppose we should remove that right?

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#9)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:25:43 PM EST
    She has a duty to protect the privacy of all the citizens who use the library. The FBI has no right to library records absent a warrant, I consider the hard drives of library computers library records. And every American has a duty to defend the Bill of Rights, IMO.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:26:02 PM EST
    But while they were waiting for the warrant they allowed the FBI to examine the computers...blockquote> That is not what the article stated.
    Ms. Glick-Weil allowed an FBI computer-forensics examiner to work with information-technology specialists at the library to narrow down which computers might have been used to send the threatening message. They determined that three computers were implicated in the alleged crime.
    So what was accomplished?
    The protection of civil liberties granted to us by the fourth amendment.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:29:57 PM EST
    But someone has the right to consent to a search don't they?
    Yes, of their own papers and effects. The computers contained the "effects" of library patrons, not the librarian persoanlly. She would have no right to consent.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#12)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:29:57 PM EST
    Ms. Glick-Weil allowed an FBI computer-forensics examiner to work with information-technology specialists at the library to narrow down which computers might have been used to send the threatening message. They determined that three computers were implicated in the alleged crime.
    How do you suppose they accomplished that?

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#13)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:32:29 PM EST
    She would have no right to consent.
    Then she can't refuse something she has no right to allow. Which is the claim in the title of this thread.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:38:58 PM EST
    Sure she can, she is the custodian of library records. It's her job to protect them. If I walked into a library and asked what books Joe Blow borrowed, I would hope the librarian would refuse my request. Same goes for an FBI agent without a warrant.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 01:40:18 PM EST
    How do you suppose they accomplished that?
    By examining network logs.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#16)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 02:17:07 PM EST
    So warrants should never be necessary in Public establishments? Please tell me P, why should she have said "have free reign?"

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 02:26:17 PM EST
    Does a criminal who uses public computers as an instrument of that crime have a "reasonable" expectation of privacy in their contents? Last I knew, one was innocent till proven guilty. Oh, now I get it... he was a terrist

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 02:44:50 PM EST
    If she got the FBI to seize 3 computers rather than 30, then I'd say she accomplished a great deal for the library patrons, since who knows when those computers, presumably bought with taxpayer funds, will be seen again? That's ignoring the issue of protecting privacy. And it does look like Glick-Weil's affiliation needs to be corrected in the post.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#19)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 02:57:52 PM EST
    So warrants should never be necessary in Public establishments?
    Only if there's a reasonable expectation of privacy. Is there in this case? Best reason I've heard so far is to protect the other patrons, which may be valid.
    Last I knew, one was innocent till proven guilty.
    Yep but that's a legal distinction and doesn't mean a crime wasn't committed. Or that there isn't legal justification to follow-up on it.
    By examining network logs.
    Exactly, something that they could have also been required to obtain a warrant for no doubt.
    Please tell me P, why should she have said "have free reign?"
    I don't know that she should have, it all depends on her reason for refusal, and we don't know that yet. Like I said, if she did it just to be obstructionist, then I think she was wrong. If she had the authority to consent. If she didn't then this whole discussion is moot, and she's no more a hero than any other librarian.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#20)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 03:04:45 PM EST
    Brandeis has one of the longest standing reputations of radicalism of any university in the U.S; I wouldnt be that suprised if this turned out to be an exercise in Nixonian intimidation. These rethugs, with little of Nixons subtlty ( which still isnt saying much), are going to eventually hang themselves - mark my words.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 03:08:18 PM EST
    Best reason I've heard so far is to protect the other patrons, which may be valid.
    It is a valid argument.
    Exactly, something that they could have also been required to obtain a warrant for no doubt.
    Yes, but far less intrusive than examining the actual contents of 30 computers absent the library's IT staff.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#22)
    by Sailor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 03:12:14 PM EST
    macro, exactly. Patrick, seizing 30 computers because ONE of them MIGHT have sent a message is the definition of a fishing expedition. Personally I think she was wrong to work with the fbi at all. She wasn't 'protecting' one criminal, she was defending thousands of patrons. Besides, the original message had all the info necessary in the header to identify the complete route of the message. I'm amazed 3 computers could be identified, when only one could have sent the message, but more info than was in the article needs to be given to examine that.
    According to Mayor Cohen, the warrant allows the FBI to view only the threatening e-mail message and the messages sent immediately before and after that message.
    And what makes me most doubt the fbi is that they still claim they didn't need a warrant. If they didn't need one they wouldn't have gotten one. Also, note the footer to the article, it wasn't timely after all. Gee, good thing they didn't find her prints on luggage in Spain.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 03:14:21 PM EST
    Jondee, the post seems to have garbled the facts a bit. The article says the computers were in a Newton public library, not at Brandeis. Brandeis was the place threatened.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#24)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 03:28:48 PM EST
    My bad. I'll just have concoct another anti-rightwing tangent. Get back to you soon.

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#25)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 08:59:27 AM EST
    Shorter Patrick: "We don't need no stinking BADGES!"

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#26)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 09:00:00 AM EST
    Shorter Patrick: "We don't need no stinking BADGES!"

    Re: Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers (none / 0) (#27)
    by Lis Riba on Wed Feb 01, 2006 at 09:13:42 AM EST
    Since you've since added subsequent posts to the blog, could you correct the misinformation in this post? I'm starting to see the "Brandeis librarian" spread across the blogosphere like a bad game of telephone.

    Librarian Refuses to Let FBI Take Computers | 27 comments (27 topical)