Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Terror threat sparks Newton librarian/FBI standoff
Boston Herald ^ | 01/25/06 | Dan Atkinson

Posted on 01/25/2006 12:05:00 PM PST by danno3150

Newton officials are calling their refusal to allow FBI agents access to library computers without a warrant during a terrorist threat last week “their finest hour.”

Law enforcement officials say it’s a “nightmare.”

Police rushed to the Newton Free Library after tracing a terrorist threat e-mailed to Brandeis University to a computer at the library.

But requests to examine computers Jan. 18 were rebuffed by Newton library Director Kathy Glick-Weil and Mayor David Cohen on the grounds that they did not have a warrant.

Cohen, defending the library’s actions, called the legal standoff one of Newton’s “finest hours.”

“We showed you can enforce the law — without jeopardizing the privacy of innocent citizens,” the mayor said.

It took U.S. attorneys several hours to finally secure a warrant, Glick-Weil said, and they took the computer from the library at about 11:30 that night, after the library had closed.

Brandeis received the alleged e-mail threat at about 11 a.m., according to Waltham Lt. Brian Navin. While police reportedly didn’t find anything threatening after evacuating 12 buildings at Brandeis and a nearby elementary school, by about 2 p.m., the e-mail was traced to a computer at the Newton Free Library.

Newton police, followed shortly by FBI and state police officers, rushed to the library to lock the building down, Glick-Weil said.

“There was a lot of excitement going on,” she said.

An FBI spokesman, as well as Lt. Bruce Apotheker of the Newton police, both said their offices would not comment on the investigation.

But a law enforcement official close to the investigation said in an e-mail the confrontation was a “nightmare.”

Nancy Murray, director of education for the Boston branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she was surprised the FBI asked for information without a warrant.

“They couldn’t possibly expect to get (the computer) without a warrant,” she said. “Good for the library for knowing more about warrants than the police.”


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Massachusetts; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bombthreat; cohen; davidcohen; fbi; glickweil; librarian; library; librarycomputers; mayor; mayorcohen; newton; newtonma; searchwarrant; weil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-143 next last
To: petitfour

I could be wrong, but I have always assumed that the records of public libraries are a matter of public record.


41 posted on 01/25/2006 12:47:29 PM PST by Skooz (Modesty hides my thighs in her wings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy

You barely escaped this time


42 posted on 01/25/2006 12:49:48 PM PST by txhurl (Gingrich/North '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus

It was probably a set up by them...they knew the library wasn't going to blow...so they exercised what they think is their right...to get back at W.


43 posted on 01/25/2006 12:50:45 PM PST by shield (The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instructions.Pr 1:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief
If someone had died, because of their nonsense...

Agreed,but that woudn't matter in Newton.To give you an idea of what I'm saying,keep in mind that Newton is heavily Jewish but the majority of the resident think that Israel is the second most dangerous and oppressive nation on Earth, after the US.

44 posted on 01/25/2006 12:54:56 PM PST by Gay State Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: dinasour
"...Since they are the library's computers, which are in effect the government's computers, they can and should agree."

An argument can be made that the public owns the computers and not the government.

Given the way most libraries are funded, I'd have to challenge that statement.

45 posted on 01/25/2006 12:55:13 PM PST by randomnumber (I have no excuse for my behavior; do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: danno3150
Newton officials are calling their refusal to allow FBI agents access to library computers without a warrant during a terrorist threat last week “their finest hour.”

I lived/worked in Newton for 4 years. The people there, on the whole, don't have 2 brain cells to rub together.
46 posted on 01/25/2006 12:56:35 PM PST by Antoninus (The only reason you're alive today is because your parents were pro-life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Public library and the folks wanting access to the computers were citizens. Anyone sitting at one of the computers would have had the same basic access to anything that they would have...


47 posted on 01/25/2006 12:57:48 PM PST by trebb ("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: danno3150
Nancy Murray, director of education for the Boston branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she was surprised the FBI asked for information without a warrant. “They couldn’t possibly expect to get (the computer) without a warrant,” she said. “Good for the library for knowing more about warrants than the police.”

Why would the FBI not possibly expect to get the computer without a warrant? Warrants are only required when the party you want information or materials from does not wish to give it up voluntarily. Why wouldn't the library wish to do so?

It has nothing to do with the FBI not knowing more about warrants than the library does. It has to do with the FBI thinking, incorrectly in this case, that the library might understand that when lives are possibly at stake, they should expect some cooperation from a public official.

If I lived in Newton, I'd move that the librarian be fined or fired.

48 posted on 01/25/2006 12:57:57 PM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: danno3150
"Shoot the hostage librarian."


49 posted on 01/25/2006 12:59:35 PM PST by Stultis (I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

"It's a judge's call to define probable cause, not a librarian's - that's why law enforcement officials are required to secure a warrant before conducting searches."

Couldn't this fall under the category of a hot pursuit? It reads like a terror threat was recieved, immediately traced to a specific location, and when the cops arrived, a bureaucrat says not so fast.

If someone is shot on the street in front of the library, and the perp is seen to run inside, do the police need a warrant to pursue?


50 posted on 01/25/2006 1:00:50 PM PST by Jim Verdolini (We had it all, but the RINOs stalked the land and everything they touched was as dung and ashes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: randomnumber

"If it were me, I might have agreed to the search given the circumstances if it were explained reasonably, but since I wasn't, I'll go with door number 1."

Brings me to another question...does one need a warrant to search a public building?


51 posted on 01/25/2006 1:03:12 PM PST by Jim Verdolini (We had it all, but the RINOs stalked the land and everything they touched was as dung and ashes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: randomnumber
An argument can be made that the public owns the computers and not the government.

And I think and argument could be made to get the warrant, then arrest the librarian as an accessory for knowingly allowing their computers to be used for terrorist activities.

Then she would have more articles in the bill of rights to assert.

52 posted on 01/25/2006 1:04:20 PM PST by dinasour (Pajamahadeen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: dinasour
Prove the librarian knew the computers were used for terrorist activities>
53 posted on 01/25/2006 1:07:30 PM PST by randomnumber (I have no excuse for my behavior; do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: danno3150

I would've told the librarians, "Look no further, folks, we found the originators of the bomb threat," cuffed them, and given them the "diesel treatment."


54 posted on 01/25/2006 1:10:05 PM PST by BeHoldAPaleHorse (Tagline deleted at request of moderator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: danno3150

So, if say Boston gets nuked due to an email from this library, is the town of Newton liable while they sat around waiting for a warrant?


55 posted on 01/25/2006 1:11:19 PM PST by lexington minuteman 1775
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: randomnumber

The library may have been within their rights, but not their right minds. The 4th amendment search rules can be annulled via consent - which is what the librarians withheld, forcing the use of a warrant. Because the library is not a private space, there is arguably no reasonable expectation of privacy on behalf of the user of a computer library.

I hope their obstinancy never causes harm or death to an innocent due to delays in investigating by the police/FBI.

My $.02


56 posted on 01/25/2006 1:17:18 PM PST by MortMan (There is no substitute for victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Have you actually read the 4th Amendment? It's not apparent to anyone except an ACLU lawyer that it would apply to this sort of case (which certainly is far from anything the founders could have discussed in 1789).... a case of immediate terrorist threat issued from PUBLIC property utilizing PUBLICLY owned equipment. The 4th Amendment refers to "unreasonable" searches, and how could anyone except a terrorist or sympathizer think it's "unreasonable" for officials to rush to examine a PUBLICLY owned computer, accessible to all, from which the threat had been issued.... the first clause of the 4th Amendment refers to being "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects"..... we are talking about a publicly owned computer in a public space, not anyone's private person-house-papers-effects.... unless the founders are somehow supposed to have imagined sending emails from public PCs more than 200 years ago.... this was in no way a case of searching anyone's home, personal property, car, etc. The 2nd clause of the 4th Amendment, describing conditions for warrants being issued, should not apply to PUBLIC property open to use by all (though given the lunacy of so much constitutional jurisprudence in recent decades, I'm not at all surprised that they had to wait 12 hours to be allowed to examine evidence of a possible imminent terrorist attack). fwiw, I use computers in several public libraries all the time, and it never would have occurred to me to expect or demand some absolute right of privacy there, on public property, if a terrorist threat were issued from one of those PCs..... I'd expect it would be quite "reasonable" for the FBI, etc. to be able to act immediately to access them under emergency conditions.

4th AMENDMENT: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
57 posted on 01/25/2006 1:19:27 PM PST by Enchante (Democrats: "We are ALL broken and worn out, our party & ideas, what else is new?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jim Verdolini
"Brings me to another question...does one need a warrant to search a public building?"

I don't know, but an interesting read is at a DOJ web page Here "Searching and Seizing Computers and Obtaining Electronic Evidence in Criminal Investigations."

58 posted on 01/25/2006 1:21:28 PM PST by randomnumber (I have no excuse for my behavior; do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: balch3

Then declare martial law. Or change the Amendment. The fourth Amendment is very clear.


59 posted on 01/25/2006 1:23:55 PM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: randomnumber
Prove the librarian knew the computers were used for terrorist activities

She is knowingly covering up for a terrorist. She can say, "yes", and she has no obligation to say, "no".

If the police came to my door and said my house guest, who is hiding in the basement, was suspected of terrorism and asked to speak to him. I would say, "Right this way, officer".

I would not say, "Go get a warrant", and hope he gets away.

I would be harboring a fugitive, in spirit, if not in fact, and the librarian is harboring a terrorist, in spirit, if not in fact.

60 posted on 01/25/2006 1:29:30 PM PST by dinasour (Pajamahadeen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-143 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson