Librarian Fired for Reporting Child Pornography

[absinthe]

Originally Posted by southcitymom

But that's where it can be hard to know - Barely Legal Teens or 15 year olds? I don't think librarians should have to make that determination. Do they have Hustler and Penthouse in public libraries?

I have no problem with porn at all. I just didn't know public libraries trafficked in it.

My local public library doesn't. There is a pretty strict filter. Of course, I'm sure anyone who has the time and drive could hack around it.

[southcitymom]

Originally Posted by Pepper

This story was all over the news around here when it happened. I don't know what the status is on Brenda's complaint now. Of course Brenda's supervisor that fired her claimed that there were "other reasons" for the firing. She was on probationary status at the time because she had worked there less than 6 months. However, I believe she had worked in that capacity some years ago, so this was a rehire. The last I heard Brenda had signed a release so that her official reason for the firing could be made public. I wish I knew where it stands now.

The accused apparently has a low IQ and maybe classified as "mentally difficient" and the pictures he was viewing came from his email attachment, which is why the library filters didn't block it. My understanding is that they were pictures of young boys undressed, but not engaged in sexual acts. That doesn't make it any better, but it wasn't the really hard core stuff.

Thank you, Pepper. I knew there was more to this story. It all makes a lot more sense to me now.

[southcitymom]

BTW - Great finds, Golfmom!

[golfmom]

Originally Posted by southcitymom

But that's where it can be hard to know - Barely Legal Teens or 15 year olds? I don't think librarians should have to make that determination. Do they have Hustler and Penthouse in public libraries?

I have no problem with porn at all. I just didn't know public libraries trafficked in it.

Her description of the event when it occurred on the library files is that it was child pornography -- she saw him viewing naked boys. This wasn't adult pornography.

[golfmom]

Originally Posted by southcitymom

BTW - Great finds, Golfmom!

LOL, as always, the magical power of GOOGLE.

[golfmom]

She was on track to be put in charge of a new library facility ....

http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=16698

On January 15, 2008, the performance evaluation given by Judy Hill, the supervisor who fired Biesterfeld, stated she was performing satisfactorily. As the sole employee at the Lindsay branch, she was entrusted with managing the entire branch library. Biesterfeld had seven years experience working at other branches within Tulare County. The evaluation also mentioned additional training that was coming up in March and stated: “In April 2008, the ‘new’ Lindsay Branch Library will be completed. When it gets closer to the date of completion we will go over the move and floor plan.” On February 21, Biesterfeld was visited by the entire management of the Tulare County library system, all of whom reiterated that Biesterfeld would very soon assume responsibilities for this brand new facility. A few days after that visit, Biesterfeld was asked what color bookends she wished for the new facility.

[southcitymom]

Originally Posted by golfmom

LOL, as always, the magical power of GOOGLE.

And it didn't mess up your computer!!!

[Floh]

Originally Posted by golfmom

She was on track to be put in charge of a new library facility ....

http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=16698

On January 15, 2008, the performance evaluation given by Judy Hill, the supervisor who fired Biesterfeld, stated she was performing satisfactorily. As the sole employee at the Lindsay branch, she was entrusted with managing the entire branch library. Biesterfeld had seven years experience working at other branches within Tulare County. The evaluation also mentioned additional training that was coming up in March and stated: “In April 2008, the ‘new’ Lindsay Branch Library will be completed. When it gets closer to the date of completion we will go over the move and floor plan.” On February 21, Biesterfeld was visited by the entire management of the Tulare County library system, all of whom reiterated that Biesterfeld would very soon assume responsibilities for this brand new facility. A few days after that visit, Biesterfeld was asked what color bookends she wished for the new facility.

I hope this isn't the end of her story with the library. she should be reinstated, IMO. she was obeying the law which has to superceed all, hasn't it?

[golfmom]

Originally Posted by southcitymom

And it didn't mess up your computer!!!

It's Adnoid's fault!

[adnoid]

Originally Posted by golfmom

It's Adnoid's fault!

It's probably easier to just google things that are NOT my fault.

[golfmom]

Well, I know that list is much shorter! Cowabunga DUDE!

[SewingDeb]

Originally Posted by golfmom

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=60641

Personnel records used to justify the dismissal of a librarian who reported to police a man viewing child pornography on a public computer were changed after her dismissal, according to a law firm working on behalf of Brenda Biesterfield.

That, however, hasn't stopped the county from justifying its actions and citing the changed records.

From your link:

"The fact is that Judy Hill sought to ignore the serious crime committed in the library when Chrisler viewed child pornography," the law firm said. "She was allegedly concerned more about Chrisler having a right to view child pornography. In fact, there is no right to view child pornography, even in the privacy of the home, let alone a public library."

[SewingDeb]

April 28, 2008

Ropes, candy found in porn suspect's car
Librarian notified police when man accessed X-rated files online

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62867

[Floh]

Originally Posted by SewingDeb

From your link:

"The fact is that Judy Hill sought to ignore the serious crime committed in the library when Chrisler viewed child pornography," the law firm said. "She was allegedly concerned more about Chrisler having a right to view child pornography. In fact, there is no right to view child pornography, even in the privacy of the home, let alone a public library."

Exactly!

[Floh]

Originally Posted by SewingDeb

April 28, 2008

Ropes, candy found in porn suspect's car
Librarian notified police when man accessed X-rated files online

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62867

Case closed.

[Pepper]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62867

WND reported officials in Tulare County apparently made additions to their personnel records after the dismissal of Brenda Biesterfeld to give the appearance there were other reasons for their action.

B@$t@rds!

[golfmom]

Originally Posted by Pepper

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62867

WND reported officials in Tulare County apparently made additions to their personnel records after the dismissal of Brenda Biesterfeld to give the appearance there were other reasons for their action.

B@$t@rds!

Pepper, I found the before and afters and posted them. What's interesting is that they rated her a 5 out of 10, like that was a BAD BAD thing. In fact, a 5 by their own scale "is reasonable and consistent with normal expectations of proficiency"

[RainbowsAndGumdrops]

It is a shame that she was fired, but I disagree as to why. The level of documentation of emails, tasks, daily activities is consistent with when the library is concerned with the person's performance. I worked at a state university for a while and we had to do this for an employee so that we would have a case if we let her go right at the 6 month mark when the probabtion period would have ended. The documentation they have on her is countless little things and some not so little things such as filling in time cards wrong. The consistent trail along with the 5 of 10 at her 3 month review leads me to believe she is twisting the case. Many people that apply for government positions and are let go before their probation period put up a huge stink, seek publicity, sue, etc. I think she would have been fired even if she weren't a whistle blower. The law says that you can't be fired for being a whistle blower. It does not say that if you are a whistle blower you are immune from being fired when a case has been built against you for 5 months before the incident.

By the way, i agree she did the right thing, and that many libraries may be too lienent. I think that the library system needs to be evaluated. However, I think the issue that should be evaluated is whether they allow porn to be viewed and how they handle it. I think the library built a strong case against the fired librarian long before the incident.

[WhitneyLea]

From About.com:

Under U.S. law, a whistle blower (or whistleblower) is an employee who "tells" on an employer, because he or she reasonably believed that the employer committed an illegal act. Even if it turns out that an employer didn't actually break a law, an employee is still entitled to whistle blower protection from retaliation, if he or she reasonably believed that the employer committed an illegal act.

I would very reasonably believe that it was illegal to knowingly allow a visitor to view child porn on your computer!

Typically, to be entitled to whistle blower protection, an employee must report an employer's alleged illegal act to the proper authority, such as a government or law-enforcement agency.

She called the police.

Ahhh ... I could go on ... this just makes me so angry!! She has GOT to have some kind of legal protection here!

[golfmom]

Now the library comes out with this 2nd set of records called a "Drop File" which is supposed to be a secret journal and claim that Brenda gave them permission to release it. IMO, this is a CYA file created after her firing, to justify their actions.

http://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/app...WS01/804040338

Records released on the Internet Thursday by lawyers for former Tulare County librarian Brenda Biesterfeld come from two separate files, not a single personnel file.

[southcitymom]

Originally Posted by RainbowsAndGumdrops

It is a shame that she was fired, but I disagree as to why. The level of documentation of emails, tasks, daily activities is consistent with when the library is concerned with the person's performance. I worked at a state university for a while and we had to do this for an employee so that we would have a case if we let her go right at the 6 month mark when the probabtion period would have ended. The documentation they have on her is countless little things and some not so little things such as filling in time cards wrong. The consistent trail along with the 5 of 10 at her 3 month review leads me to believe she is twisting the case. Many people that apply for government positions and are let go before their probation period put up a huge stink, seek publicity, sue, etc. I think she would have been fired even if she weren't a whistle blower. The law says that you can't be fired for being a whistle blower. It does not say that if you are a whistle blower you are immune from being fired when a case has been built against you for 5 months before the incident.

By the way, i agree she did the right thing, and that many libraries may be too lienent. I think that the library system needs to be evaluated. However, I think the issue that should be evaluated is whether they allow porn to be viewed and how they handle it. I think the library built a strong case against the fired librarian long before the incident.

Thanks for posting. Check out the BEFORE amd AFTER Library incidents - links posted by Taxi. It's very suspicious - seems the Library may have invented some of the stuff after the facts.

[southcitymom]

Remember - there's a petition.

[SewingDeb]

Originally Posted by Floh

Case closed.

Yep! That's what it all boils down to, imo.

[SewingDeb]

Originally Posted by Floh

Exactly!

The ropes and candy were in another man's car after that man was found viewing porn at a different library. Sorry, I should have made that clear. They do mention our case a lot in the article though.

[RainbowsAndGumdrops]

Originally Posted by southcitymom

Thanks for posting. Check out the BEFORE amd AFTER Library incidents - links posted by Taxi. It's very suspicious - seems the Library may have invented some of the stuff after the facts.

The very reason I have my opinion is because of the files posted by the librarian that got fired. I think the documentation that she is providing is exactly why i am not going to sing a sob song for her. At the site http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=16698 you can click on the file before she was fired and after she was fired. It is true that the file is much bigger after she was fired and contains a lot of stuff. However, i believe this stuff was accumulated as time progressed and tracked in a side file that they would have for when they fired her. Until the decision is final, it would not have gone in her official file or permanent record. The supervisor emails to her were constantly pointing out details that she needed to be aware of and corrections she needed to make. I've been on the other side of the story here and there are reasons those emails are worded the way they are. There is a reason those comments are in emails and not just verbal. There was a reason this librarian had a 5 out of 10 on her 3 month eval. Sorry everyone, but i have to whole heartedly disagree with everyone here on this. I think there is a legit case for firing her that is completely unrelated to the whistle blowing. If they had that many problems with her during the first 6 months, they did not want to be stuck with a troubled employee potentially for the remainder of her career. After the 6 month probation period they have to decide whether to keep her forever or find someone else. I too would have chosen to look for someone better.