CSAM & Predators - Libraries Can Be Made Safer from Internet Contraband CSAM Images

November 9, 2007.  Editor: Ava Gozo.

The arrest of another sex offender for unlawful images at a public library highlights the need for continued vigilance against this disturbing form of child abuse. While the Internet is an unprecedented source of worthwhile educational information, it is also the preferred venue of many sociopaths, thieves, fraudsters, bullies and sex offenders.

Free public access to computers at libraries provide criminals with the means and mechanisms to facilitate their crimes. Sometimes when I speak with community groups and describe the surprising number of crimes being facilitated via the Internet someone asks, "Why don't they just shut the whole thing down!" - as if a switch exists somewhere that will simply cut the power to the entire Internet. 

Although the Internet is with us to stay, I doubt that the framers of our constitution could have envisioned child pornography being accessed through computers at our tax-supported public libraries. In Minneapolis, the problem with people viewing all forms of pornography on library computers became so disturbing that in 2000, librarians there filed a hostile work environment lawsuit against the city and won a large settlement. (see http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1063212018621) 

Some free speech advocates have tried to inhibit the use of Internet filters on public library computers. The argument about whether or not an individual has the right to view adult pornography on a public library computer has been decided by the Supreme Court. In 2003 the Court ruled against the American Library Association and pornography producers by authorizing filtering of pornography from public library computers. Justice Stevens said, "The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree." In his concurring opinion, the late Justice Rehnquist cited an expert who said, "The librarian's responsibility...is to separate out the gold from the garbage, not to preserve everything." (see http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-361.ZC.html) 

The law classifies child pornography differently from pornography depicting adults. Child pornography is unlawful everywhere but its potential for harm is sometimes underestimated. Apologists for the possessors of child pornography argue that the images are "only pictures" and that looking at images is acceptable and preferable to molesting a child. Such ridiculous rationalization was best refuted by Canadian Michael Brier, a viewer of Internet child pornography who murdered 10 year old Holly Jones in Toronto. He confessed that viewing the images made him "long for it" (the sex act) "in his heart." (see http://www.independent-bangladesh.com/news/dec/31/31122004wo.htm) 

In one Arizona appellate case (State of Arizona v. Morton Robert Berger, 2004) the defendant argued that because his possession of child pornography was passive and because he did not use violence, his long prison sentence was unfair. Judges Ehrlich and Hall of the Arizona Court of Appeals disagreed. They said that such logic is abstruse and cited other courts that have decided that child pornography is a form of child abuse. According to the courts, possessors of child pornography support the child pornography industry and thus support the subordination of children. The court in Berger also said that consumers of child pornography provide an economic motive for its creation and continuation; absent such encouragement and enablement, these children would not have been abused as they were. (see Haslett, 205, Ariz. at 527 P11, 73 P.3d at 1262) 

Other apologists for possessors of child pornography argue that no proven link exists between those who view child pornography and those who commit "hands-on" contact offenses. This argument was refuted when a study of prisoners in Federal custody for possession of child pornography found that a significant number had committed previously unreported acts of contact sex offenses against minors. (see http://www.kardasz.org/HernandezPrisonStudy.pdf) 

Meanwhile the troubles involving offenders viewing child pornography in libraries continue. In 2004, a Pennsylvania man raped and choked an eight year old girl in a public library restroom after viewing pornography on the computers there. (see http://citypaper.net/articles/2004-04-08/cb.shtml) Other similar incidents throughout the United States have caused some library administrators to take notice. 

While some libraries have taken affirmative steps towards protecting patrons from both adult pornography and child pornography, more work is needed. Investigators need additional tools to assist them in stopping child pornography in public libraries. I recommend the following additional steps to further improve library safety and assist law enforcement officers investigating child pornography incidents: 

1. Those who use public library computers should be required to provide and enter identification information, if only a library card number, before being permitted to use the computers. The library card number should be preserved on the library computer servers for 90 days so that in the event of a crime investigators could obtain a subpoena and retrieve the information. 

2. Computer software that filters pornography must be actively and carefully monitored in order to keep computers safe. 

3. Libraries should adjust their computer server logs to capture information about all Internet (URL) locations visited by each computer, and retain the information for at least 90 days. The captured information would not be revealed to anyone without the appropriate court order. 

4. Libraries should retain information about the library materials checked out and later returned by patrons for a period of 90 days after the items are returned. This information would not be accessible without the appropriate court order. 

5. Libraries must acknowledge that library computers become Internet service providers as defined in Federal law and subject to the provisions of law that requires them to report child pornography when it is discovered on computers. (see http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002510----000-.html)

6. Those who use information from a stolen or fraudulently obtained library card in order to access Library computers should be investigated. The Arizona law against computer tampering (ARS 13-2316.A.8) makes the offense a class six felony. Other states have similar laws. Implementing these recommendations will help make libraries safer for citizens and give law enforcement additional avenues for finding offenders when incidents occur.