Query from reader:
Does due process require that the patron be afforded a fair hearing by an unbiased fact- finder? Is a biased review by the same library staff making the initial determination sufficient?
Facts: 1. The patron was accused of intentionally throwing library materials at a staff-person. The patron maintains that upon provocation, she became angry and dropped the materials on the desk. The staff-person noted that he was "almost hit" and the patron immediately apologized and said that never would have intended to hit him. The patron left library on own. Upon next visit two weeks later, the patron was asked to leave and told that she was banned for 6 months from that branch. Review/appeal was denied. The patron continues insist that she did not "throw" materials "at" staffperson and meant no harm. Ban seems to be in nature of punishment, not fear of violence, as patron is permitted to use other branches.
Posted on request from L. Mackler
There's related discussion where this comment was originally posted.
My take: Always offer due process for anything more than a de minimus action. Example of de minimus action: Library gives a couple of warnings and on third offense asks high spirited teenagers who are horsing around (disturbing others ) to go outside until they can calm down. Library lets teens know they are welcome to return at that time.
Comments