PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Privacy of library patrons tested by sex offender

Posted on June 11, 2010 by pogowasright.org

Another case where librarians protect patron privacy, even when it may be unpopular to do so. This one is out of Washington state and written by the Tri-City Herald staff:

It stuck in our craw too.

A registered sex offender reportedly approached children at a Kennewick branch of the Mid-Columbia Library District, and library officials seemed less than cooperative with police.

The library, according to a spokeswoman, suspended the man’s library privileges but refused to tell police anything about the suspect without a subpoena.

[…]

After children complained about a library patron’s behavior, police asked library officials about the suspect’s identity.

The information investigators sought was contained in the library’s circulation records, explained Kyle Cox, the temporary head of library operations.

But state law is clear on the issue: “Librarians and library employees shall not make available library circulation records to any agency of state, federal, or local government…”

An exception, according to the statute, is granted for authorities who obtain a subpoena. In other words, without a judge’s order, libraries are required to keep private the information collected on their patrons.

As it turned out, Kennewick police were able to identify a suspect without accessing the library’s circulation records. If a subpoena had been needed, police could have obtained one without much trouble.

In the end, Russell Rust, 20, was arrested for not complying with Level II sex offender restrictions, based on information gathered without looking into the library’s circulation records.

The girls Rust allegedly bothered reported the incident to their parents, and then to police. They did the right thing, and it appears library officials did too.

Is a state law protecting library records a good idea? That’s open to debate, but we think requiring authorities to first obtain a subpoena is a reasonable protection of our constitutional right to privacy.

The Fourth Amendment protects all Americans — especially those suspected of crimes — against unreasonable search and seizure. It’s well established that our constitutional rights extend to our library records.

Regardless, library officials followed state law in this case.

Category: Surveillance

Post navigation

← Tagged.com faces new lawsuit over failure to protect children from porn
Italian bill to limit wiretaps draws fire →

Now more than ever

Search

Contact Me

Email: info@pogowasright.org

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • ARC sells airline ticket records to ICE and others
  • Clothing Retailer, Todd Snyder, Inc., Settles CPPA Allegations Regarding California Consumer Privacy Act Violations
  • US Customs and Border Protection Plans to Photograph Everyone Exiting the US by Car
  • Google agrees to pay Texas $1.4 billion data privacy settlement
  • The App Store Freedom Act Compromises User Privacy To Punish Big Tech
  • Florida bill requiring encryption backdoors for social media accounts has failed
  • Apple Siri Eavesdropping Payout Deadline Confirmed—How To Make A Claim

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • Department of Justice says Berkeley Research Group data breach may have exposed information on diocesan sex abuse survivors
  • Masimo Manufacturing Facilities Hit by Cyberattack
  • Education giant Pearson hit by cyberattack exposing customer data
  • Star Health hacker claims sending bullets, threats to top executives: Reports
  • Nova Scotia Power hit by cyberattack, critical infrastructure targeted, no outages reported
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.
Menu
  • About
  • Privacy