Library Chief Criticized for Requiring Subpoena

sudnshok writes "Hasbrouck Heights (NJ) Library Director Michele Reutty is under fire for refusing to give police library circulation records without a subpoena. Her lawyer explained, 'Reutty did the right thing... At no time did Michele Reutty say to any police officer or anybody else that she would not give the information if it was properly requested.' However, borough labor lawyer Ellen Horn, who also represented the library trustees, said Reutty was 'more interested in protecting' her library than helping the police. 'It was an absolute misjudgment of the seriousness of the matter,' Horn said."

Protecting privacy

[tekspot (531917)]

protecting privacy is not "cool" any more...

sad day

Oh the Pain

[schneidafunk (795759)]

FTA: the mayor called it "a blatant disregard for the Police Department"

When the police are breaking the laws (or sneaking around them) who do we ask to protect us?

Re:Oh the Pain

[QuantumG (50515)]

I don't ask anyone to protect me. It's not the job of the police to "protect and serve" no matter what their slogan says. It's the job of the police to investigate crime and arrest suspects so that the courts can accurately determine their guilt or innocence.

Re:Oh the Pain

[Saedrael (880381)]

What, exactly, is your point? The police are supposed to be protecting you by investigating crime and arresting suspects. Laws don;t exist in a vacuum; they are designed (or they should be) to protect you.

Propaganda in the UK

[whoever57 (658626)]

I was horrified by a drama that BBC America has shown in the USA, I assume it was previously broadcast in the UK. I am referring to Murder Prevention Unit [bbcamerica.com].

In this drama, the police use illegal means to trap potential criminals.

None of the police are ever criticised or punished in any meaningful way for breaking the rules. The drama shows the rights of innocent people being routinely and egreiously trampled upon.

I see it as the BBC portraying what some people in government would like. No restraint on the police, no rules of evidence, no need, in fact for actual evidence -- just lock up (or better still, shoot) the people you think are the "bad guys". How many people will watch the drama and later think it is OK for the police to take such actions becasue "they have seen it on TV"?

Re:Oh the Pain

[terrymr (316118)]

There's buttons here : https://www.ala.org/ala/oif/basics/basicrelatedlin ks/radicalbutton.htm [ala.org]

The phrase "Radical Militant Librarian" was used by the FBI to describe exactly this situation where somebody actually insisted on following the law.

Key quote from TFA

[daveschroeder (516195)]

"I followed the law. And because I followed the law, at the end of the day, the policemen's case is going to hold strong. Nobody is going to sue the library and nobody is going to sue the municipality of Hasbrouck Heights because information was given out illegally."

That's actually the best argument she can make. Any case prosecutors will have against this man will be much stronger because the library complied with the applicable law(s) when responding to a police request. What if that evidence had been thrown out because it was illegally, or at least questionably, obtained?

Grandma was right

[Marko DeBeeste (761376)]

Teachers and librarians are the real heroes. They change the world without ever kicking down a door.

Journalism isn't an exact science

[jd (1658)]

And journalists rarely let facts get in the way of a good story. So, I would caution people to not assume everything printed is correct. Nonetheless, to whatever degree it is true that a librarian was asked to break the law by the police, the librarian was in the right to refuse. She is likely to be punished, possibly severely, regardless. I doubt the city or the police will forget in a hurry, no matter who was in the right, and that should be the real point of concern. When revenge becomes more important than upholding the law, there is no law. It is a troubling cultural divide by zero error.

Re:Journalism isn't an exact science

[ClamIAm (926466)]

I doubt the city or the police will forget in a hurry, no matter who was in the right, and that should be the real point of concern.

Any person who wants to raise a concern or stand up for what they believe in is a "troublemaker", and will be dealt with accordingly. It doesn't matter what it is, the fact remains that they oppose someone in power, and will be harassed unless there is massive public outcry (or lawsuits that prevent further harassment).

Also, this isn't limited to police. Any organization, church or business will have a certain code that, when broken, results in labeling the perpetrator a "heretic" or somesuch.

Also also, I'm not being Orwellian here. This is the way things have always been.

Duh?

[keyne9 (567528)]

'more interested in protecting' her library than helping the police.

You don't say? That's precisely why that rule exists in the first place! Fucking morons.

huh?

[spiritraveller (641174)]

From TFA:
Borough labor lawyer Ellen Horn, who also represented the library trustees, said Reutty was "more interested in protecting" her library than helping the police.

"It was an absolute misjudgment of the seriousness of the matter," Horn said at Tuesday's meeting.

What utter bullshit. She doesn't work for the police, and it is her job and her legal mandate to protect the privacy of people who check out books from her library.

These "borough officials" are nothing but a bunch of grandstanding politician assholes trying to make their careers by harassing a librarian who was doing her job the way it should be done. They should all be voted out of office.

Send your thanks to...

[mattkime (8466)]

A quick googling reveals that you can send your thanks and support to [e-mail] [mailto].

I already have.

(Does anyone else just love that some cases are too important for proper legal procedure? They should have gotten warrants in the first place...)

I'm Sick of Appeals to Fear

[verisof (970392)]

In September, I ran the datacenter in the Houston Astrodome during the Hurricane Katrina disaster. The organization I was working for (a large international organization that provides relief in disasters, hint hint) keeps data on the people who seek help private. In fact, that's their mantra. I received visits from no less than FOUR Department of Homeland Security deputies who wanted to get their hands on the refugee data, purportedly to track sexual predators. Some of these requests were polite and some were not. I've encountered similar requests within the last year for data in my corporate job as well.

It's my observation that these people will ALWAYS appeal to our base fear when they encounter barriers to getting the data they want, knowing that no one wants to aid and abet "Sexual Predators" or "Terrorists". That's why the due process laws, calling for subpoenas are in place here in the US (but for how long?) I can only hope that we can come to our senses and end this gross abuse of power. . . . Has anyone else had similar experiences? How come we never really hear much about it?

Re:I'm Sick of Appeals to Fear

[daveschroeder (516195)]

How come we never really hear much about it?

Um, are you shitting me? Like, are you really serious?

We hear about this ALL THE FUCKING TIME, especially on the internet (e.g., blogs).

Constantly.

More than we ever have before, and more every day. And it's not because there are "more abuses"; there's more people hunting for and collecting evidence about said abuses. Some of these people do it out of genuine concern. Most of these people do it because their political leanings are crystal clear.

And you know what? There aren't really any more or less "abuses" than there ever have been; there are just much easier ways to spread the word. That's what makes people believe we're heading down the primrose path to a fascist state and all this other crap.

Technology cuts both ways: it makes it easier for the government to abuse rights and freedoms, and it makes it easier for everyone else to find out and call them on it.

Protecting the library

[jmv (93421)]

Reutty was 'more interested in protecting' her library [and its users] than helping the police

I think I'd actually be proud if someone said something like that about me.

It's ironic...

[Spy der Mann (805235)]

that the ones supposed to UPHOLD the Law are the first ones wanting to BREAK the Law.

Second - the Library director did the right thing. Why? Because if the information she gave was obtained without "due process", the pedophile could get free because of this. Now who would be the one to blame? The Library. Wonderful.

I'd pretty much tell the stupid police to just do their job and STFU.

My hero

[peacefinder (469349)]

Far from being an "... absolute misjudgment of the seriousness of the matter", this librarian correctly realized that it was a serious matter which she was not qualified or empowered to judge. She deferred to the courts, which are only appropriate and authorized arbiter of police search powers.

Bravo, Ms. Reutty!

This is to be expected

[dreemernj (859414)]

If she hadn't forced them to follow the letter of the law, whoever this person was that broke the law initially could have turned around and used the illegal obtaining of his records in court to get the case thrown out.

That exact scenario has happened before, where these small-town cops get worked up, don't follow the rules, and it ends up hurting what could have been a simple, open-shut case if they had just had patience. I really wish I could post a link to the details (I've spent a lot of time in Jersey Boroughs) but usually there is little to no public record, things get lost, or safety nets are put in place.

Its really really sad actually.

Re:She Did The Wrong Thing

[by Anonymous Coward]

Warrants are there for a reason.

What if the dangerous paedophile actually managed, through hard work and dedication, to get a job on the police force? Sure, the overwhelming majority of police are good, but it's definitely possible for ONE bad cop to get through. Should he be able to get your child's records without anyone even looking over his work to determine if it's 'warranted'?

Food for thought.

Re:She Did The Wrong Thing

[inKubus (199753)]

Alleged sex offender. Allegedly scoping out your child. What's stopping them from pulling YOUR library records because they don't like you, and making up some story to throw you behind bars. This dude was 23, probably was a skateboarder or something and said "lick me where I pee" but the police wants to get rid of such a trouble maker so they just pin sexual comments on him. Maybe the girl threw something at his car, or maybe she's lying. God knows 12 year olds NEVER lie. I don't see how someone's library records could possibly stop a life or death situation. You see that stupid crap in the movies all the time but that doesn't make it real. Real police work is tedious and exhaustive. It has to be that way to protect the innocent. That is what sets America apart from the rest of the world. Now if a bunch of Redneck cops want to flex on the constitution, and then COMPLAIN that the librarian didn't LET THEM? Shit, it's every citizen's duty to make sure that the constitution is followed and to speak out if it isn't. For the protection of future generations. But I forgot, only "lefties" think about the future.

Re:She Did The Wrong Thing

[rumblin'rabbit (711865)]

It's not "her" library,

Perhaps not, but she has been entrusted with running it. She is responsible for the library, and presumably would be held to task if she shirked that duty.

She's obstructing justice

Nope. Obstructing justice is a specific crime, and this librarian came no where near to committing such a crime. Quite the opposite - she kept strictly to the law.

Re:She Did The Wrong Thing

[vertinox (846076)]

The police are out there busting their hump, protecting you and me. 99% of them are good

Apparently you've never been pulled over by a cop in Georgia.

Re:Why do you hate America?

[fozzy1015 (264592)]

Unless you are "fighting terror", an improperly conducted search will get thrown out by the courts and then the "bad guys" usually get a walk.

Why should there be an exception for "fighting terror?"

It is the mindset though. Look for more and more things to fall under the concept of 'fighting terror' as a way to get around due process and the Bill of Rights. I remember hearing some guy on NPR say some members of LA gangs were 'street terrorists'.

Re:The news just ate it up.

[SatanicPuppy (611928)]

Of course they did. Journalists file FOIA requests all day long, and have to wade through mountains of forms to get information that should be freely available to any citizen, if the governement wasn't fricking corrupt. Cops are supposed to have to do the same thing for data that isn't freely available. That's the law. And after filing dozens of FOIA requests for police reports, you bet your ass they jumped on it when the cops tried to pretend like they were above the law.

On top of that journalists are in a position where they can end up in posession of information that the government wants to know, and unlike librarians, they don't have the luxury of giving that info up if they want to continue in their careers. Strong and respected privacy laws are very much in their self interest.

And finally, journalists tend to be literate library affectionados, and, as such, are well disposed toward spunky, privacy-respecting librarians.