City closes the book on Karkos case
By Mark LaFlamme
and Chris Williams
,
Staff Writers
Saturday, August 30, 2008
LEWISTON - The showdown between the city and JoAn Karkos ended Friday even though Karkos failed to return a library book she has deemed obscene.
Karkos will not be ordered to jail for violating a judge's orders. The city will not continue trying to wrest from her a copy of "It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex and Sexual Health."
There will be no national debate drawn to Lewiston based on the arrest of a 64-year-old grandmother.
City leaders believe they made the right choice by choosing to drop the matter. Karkos, they say, still has to pay a $100 fine and cannot return to the library until she does so.
"Going any further on this, really, I don't see any other gain that the city is going to have," Lewiston City Administrator Jim Bennett said.
Karkos said she would have been happy to see it go further. By dismissing the matter, she said, the city is trying to make the issue go away.
"They didn't do me any favors," Karkos said Friday night. "They knew what they were doing. They were protecting themselves."
Karkos checked the book out of the library last summer and has refused to return it. She has stated publicly that she finds the book obscene and that she does not feel it is appropriate for the library to stock it.
Critics have lambasted Karkos, saying one woman should not be allowed to make judgments on behalf of other people who might feel differently.
"We felt that one person does not have the power to keep a book from the 36,000 citizens of Lewiston," Public Library Director Richard Speers said on Wednesday.
Some critics felt Karkos should be ordered to jail after refusing to turn the book over upon instruction from a judge at a court hearing Wednesday.
Bennett, however, said that proceeding with that kind of legal action would have accomplished nothing. Putting the matter to rest, he said, is in the best interest of the city. It saves money that would need to be spent to pursue the case in court, he said, and will keep Lewiston from becoming the epicenter of the debate over decency in publications.
"We're not caving at all," he said. "Is it appropriate to spend any more of the limited resources that we have, in these tough economic times, to allow the city of Lewiston to be the place to play out this national and state debate? I don't think that's an appropriate use of those funds."
Karkos was told of the resolution of the case early Friday afternoon. She saw it as less about searching for a good solution than the city trying to hide from the issue.
"They just said, 'Get that lady away from us. She is an intrusion. She is an embarrassment to us,'" Karkos said. "I guess I called their bluff."
The city issued a statement Friday afternoon spelling out its decision to drop the matter.
"This decision is not made lightly or without thoughtful consideration," Bennett wrote. "By taking this step, it should not be seen as a backing down by the city. The library now has four copies of the same book, all donated by others, instead of the one that existed."
If Karkos fails to pay the $100 fine, further court action would likely ensue. She said Friday night she had not decided whether she would comply.
"That's still an issue," she said. "It's something I'll have to think about."
Library Director Speers said that facility stands by its system of determining what is appropriate for the bookshelves.
"We feel that kids and their parents need educational materials," Speers said. "An educated person is an empowered person."
Karkos, on the other hand, stood by her claim that the book is more about dirty pictures than education.
"I guess I was shocked to find out that the library is exempt from obscenity laws," she said. "To me, that is thoroughly disheartening." |
CLICK HERE To Show/Hide Discussion Thread - (50 Comments)
Comments
 |
Posted By:NightCrawler at August 30, 2008 5:16 AM (Suggest Removal) OK, so it turns out that Karkos actually checked the book out of the library. She didn't "steal" the book. She just didn't return it. Based on this fact, WHY should Karkos be treated any differently than anybody else who doesn't return a library book that they checked out? Do little kids get taken to court over this sort of thing? Do adults? Of course not. Usually the library suspends your library privileges and sends you notices that your book is overdue. Karkos got singled out because she DARED to speak out about a pornographic book that the library, in their infinite wisdom. deemed "appropriate" for children to read and look at the pictures.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Citizen at August 30, 2008 6:00 AM (Suggest Removal) Why should she be treated any different-I'll tell you why, she didn't intend to return it(her own admission) and was trying to push her morals & values on others. QUOTE:"Bennett, however, said that proceeding with that kind of legal action would have accomplished nothing" - WRONG - it would of gave her the attention the KOOK was seeking.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:mark at August 30, 2008 6:03 AM (Suggest Removal) It was not a book for children to read, it was a book for parents o read WITH thier children if THEY determine it is time to do so and Ms Karkos, nightcrawler, nor anyone else will determine when my family is ready to discuss the birds and the bees! It is our decision, not yours.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Philster at August 30, 2008 6:39 AM (Suggest Removal) City of Lewiston lost thanks to Jim Bennett. JoAn Karkos won.
"The library now has four copies of the same book, all donated by others, instead of the one that existed."
Kiss those copies goodbye.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:concerned at August 30, 2008 6:47 AM (Suggest Removal) Nightcrawler, Lewiston contacted the woman, more than once, to ask that the book be returned. She refused, more than once. So Lewiston went to the next step on their policy, bringing the responsible party to small claims court.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:ROCKO at August 30, 2008 6:58 AM (Suggest Removal) Its nice the lady does not have togo to Jail,But what message does it send to everyone else??? Sometimes we send people to jail others dont get to go Im sorry Mr Bennet you have done more harm thab good,just like your guiding of the city,please do us all a favor ans=d retire.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Bob at August 30, 2008 6:59 AM (Suggest Removal) Thank you Ms. Karkos for taking a stand. Too bad the library refuses moral gatekeeper responsibilities. What's next, Richard Speers, XXX videos?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Mark at August 30, 2008 7:12 AM (Suggest Removal) Censorship....at the taxpayers expense. Slippery slope!!! The court did the right thing.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Bob at August 30, 2008 7:22 AM (Suggest Removal) CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF; OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS; OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES.
The Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution was ratified on December 15, 1791
“Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime . . . .” — Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, dissenting Ginzberg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966)
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Sarah at August 30, 2008 7:29 AM (Suggest Removal) On one hand I think what Ms. Karkos did was wrong. It was premeditated and purposeful. On the other hand, had she been sent to jail, I'm sure she would have suffered the injustice with martyr-like dignity. And the last thing Ms. Karkos should be ( or the system should make her into) is a martyr for this "cause".
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:uwish at August 30, 2008 7:31 AM (Suggest Removal) Maybe Ms. Karkos looks at the book when she uses hers "special night time toys". Crazy Old Lady
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:humanbeing at August 30, 2008 7:35 AM (Suggest Removal) Yes, she used her freedom of speech and addressed her grievances!
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:horsefeathers at August 30, 2008 7:41 AM (Suggest Removal) Too bad, I was hoping that it would go to the national media like the ham sandwich did.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Lady Jay at August 30, 2008 7:57 AM (Suggest Removal) It is not her job to be anyone's MORAL GATEKEEPER, other than her own. I understand she may not agree with the book, The simple solution; DON't READ IT!!! Also,when one takes an item without paying for it and with the intent of not returning the item one has no longer taking the item on loan but has stolen the said item. Giving the book back is the right choice. I understand the city dropping the case. Tax payers money can be better spent elsewhere. This women got away with theft.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:ski at August 30, 2008 8:01 AM (Suggest Removal) They should arrest her!!!!!! She had no intention of returning the book. That is absolutely ridiculas. She has every right to express her disaproval of the book but she had no right to take it upon herself to decide what is good for other people's children.
Again authroities caving to the bullies....
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Jen at August 30, 2008 8:09 AM (Suggest Removal) I agree with the city not wasting anymore money on this crazy old hag, but she thinks she has WON. That's the worst part.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Dave at August 30, 2008 8:21 AM (Suggest Removal) Good call for the city. Pushing further would have only given her the attention she craved. She may be claiming victory, but she knows perfectly well that she has been thwarted. The library has numerous copies of the book, has not changed its policy on what kinds of books to stock, and she is on the fast track back to obscurity.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Joe at August 30, 2008 8:23 AM (Suggest Removal) No one gives a cow dung about this wacko. The library has more copies, and the pathological woman can only re-enter the library when she pays the fine. Let's just turn a deaf ear to these moralizing, religious nut cases.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Bugged at August 30, 2008 8:26 AM (Suggest Removal) What a bunch of falderall. Good for you Mr. Bennett. You did the right thing. Now lets not hear anymore about this rabblerouser Karkos. THE END
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Lil at August 30, 2008 8:38 AM (Suggest Removal) If she really didn't want people to see the book, she wouldn't have drawn so much attention to it. And I don't recall seeing anywhere that the library forced people to read the book against their will. If you don't like the book, don't read it. Is that so hard to understand?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Bulldog at August 30, 2008 8:44 AM (Suggest Removal) If Karkos fails to pay the $100 fine, further court action would likely ensue. She said Friday night she had not decided whether she would comply. "That's still an issue," she said. "It's something I'll have to think about."
Well, let me tell ya sister: If you fail to pay your fine, you should be arrested!!! How many people out there have been arrested for failure to pay a court appointed fine?!! If they don't arrest her, then something is wrong with our court system.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:linda at August 30, 2008 8:53 AM (Suggest Removal) Mr Bennett did the right thing in saving the taxpayers money by settleing this the way he did. She, did nothing but DRAW attention to the book..I'm sure 99% of the people did not even know this book existed till she did this..and now 'the kids',( who she says she is protecting ), ALL want to know 'whats in the book'! She needs to be ban from the library for life...not just till she pays the fine...you know she is not going to pay so she can keep this going....once she gets back in to the library...you can bet she will do the same thing again...and again...and again...because of HER believes....It is my choice what books I chose from the public library...not hers......
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:moose at August 30, 2008 8:56 AM (Suggest Removal) karkos is a super nut. Just who does she thinks she is.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Mike at August 30, 2008 9:04 AM (Suggest Removal) She thinks she's a woman who cares about the salvation of souls. She tried to pay for that book. The reaction by the library to her attempt to pay is disgraceful.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:SCOTT at August 30, 2008 9:24 AM (Suggest Removal) Exempt from obscenity laws? Pssshh.. I guess that depends on what you morally consider obscene. I am sure there are several things in the library and all over the city for that matter, that people might consider obscene but the fact is, we have a right to see or read it. Should we ban the encyclopedia as well? I'm sure there are pictures and scenes from videos ALL over that library, even just text that SOME people might find obscene. Get real Karkos, you can't force your moral agenda on anyone except yourself. Quit being a thief. What you have done is obscene. Hey Mike, if you don't already know, Librabies are LENDING places not places where you can just go and STEAL stuff then try to pay for it. Isn't stealing a sin?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:proud at August 30, 2008 9:31 AM (Suggest Removal) BRAVO!!!! Good for you Ms. Karkos. You too have freedoms. Why should your freedom of speech be taken away. At least some of our society still has some morals. Pretty scary...they wanted to put you in jail for not returning a library book. Go check the library and see how many others have not returned books before. Pretty soon our community is going to be wanting to send all of our precious children to jail because they didn't return their library book. Wake up people. Grow up. Start acting your age and take responsibilities that belong to a parent. Actually, start acting like adults, like parents, and educate your children in the areas that are your responsibility. Stop being a coward and expect a book to do your job.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Robert61 at August 30, 2008 9:39 AM (Suggest Removal) Yes, today she wins the Battle, but overall Lewiston wins the War. This needs to become a dead issue.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Angela at August 30, 2008 9:42 AM (Suggest Removal) She should have to pay the court cost for this spectacle she created. Didn't this sort of thing happen in the past.. Oh yeah it was the Bible people felt was offensive wasn't it. Hiel Karkos
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Keith at August 30, 2008 9:54 AM (Suggest Removal) So for all of those who support what she did and claim the "she tried to pay" What will you be saying if someone comes to your home takes your possessions and leaves you a couple a bucks to pay for what they took. I am pretty willing to bet you will calling the police claiming theft.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Blue Eyes at August 30, 2008 10:09 AM (Suggest Removal) This lady is loving all the attentinon. And if you all read the entire article, now she's not so sure she'll pay that $100 fine. So this will once again bring her back into the limelight. And this is considered theft, nightcrawler. She initially "borrowed" the book. With the book still in her possession, she refuses to return it. This is no longer borrowing, this is theft. I agree with what the city did as this would cost a lot of money to deal with this crazy lady. BUT, I still feel something needs to be done with her.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:JulieL at August 30, 2008 10:32 AM (Suggest Removal) We should all pitch in, pay her fine and send ANOTHER copy of
"It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex and Sexual Health," to the Auburn and Lewiston libraries. I'm sure there are books I wouldn't want my child to read in the library so guess what, WHEN I BRING HIM, I oversee what he is allowed to read, (anything violent in nature). DO I think it would be wise for all parents of boys to limit violent reading materials, yes, but I don't get to make those decisions for other families Mrs. Karkos. With the number of unwed young mothers in Maine, I think every Freshman should get a copy of "It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex and Sexual Health." I'm going to Amazon.com so I can buy several copies of "It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex and Sexual Health."
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:rob at August 30, 2008 10:50 AM (Suggest Removal) Boy, this ridiculous situation got completely blown out of proportion. Mrs. Karkos is nothing more than a nutjob whose views deserve no special attention. Instead, she's put into the spotlight for a pathetic act of defiance. Had the city just replaced the book with no fanfare, this whole dopey situation could have been avoided.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:richard at August 30, 2008 11:58 AM (Suggest Removal) Im anxious to see if she does pay the $100.00 and is allowed back into the library, if she will procede to take the other copies out and refuse to return them...And I dont think the charge was theft...It would have been failing to comply to a court order if the city had'nt dropped it....In any event....Shes not poor,just alittle off kilt.....
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:ojhuig at August 30, 2008 12:10 PM (Suggest Removal) Whatever gets you through the night, JoAn. Enjoy your book.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:ojhuig at August 30, 2008 12:10 PM (Suggest Removal) And by the way NightCrawler, you CAN be sent to jail for failing to return library books in Lewiston. She wasn't being treated differently. She chose to behave differently by going public.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:JulieL at August 30, 2008 12:14 PM (Suggest Removal) SHe got the idea from her conservative Catholic newsmagazine.....one of my uncles is also a subscriber.....scary stuff.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:black hawk at August 30, 2008 12:22 PM (Suggest Removal) she offord them 20.95 and pay shipping instead they gave her a puplic apperance and alot of waisted court time what a bunch of idiots
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:the b at August 30, 2008 12:25 PM (Suggest Removal) you CAN be sent to jail for failing to return library books in Lewiston well if that was the case they should have throwen away the key on my i truthful cant tell you how many books that i have replaced over the years check them out and read them lose them ruined them NEVER has it been a problem i have always told them what had gone and wrote out acheck to cover the cost NEVER has it been a problem kudos to this olady for standing up for what she belives is right. right or wrong.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:chef at August 30, 2008 12:32 PM (Suggest Removal) she should be in jail now! and paying the expense for it
they lock up 64 year old grandmothers for oui don't they
the city buckled and the old bat won.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Belinda at August 30, 2008 12:33 PM (Suggest Removal) I understand the city's point of view but she has no right to be treated as any less than anyone else that commits a crime. This is a great example to those considering such self rightous behavior to go ahead and commit the crimes because, you won't be punished.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:ojhuig at August 30, 2008 1:04 PM (Suggest Removal) While I don't agree with Jim Bennett that the city should try to stay out of a national public discourse, he's right about the expense.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Chris at August 30, 2008 1:06 PM (Suggest Removal) Good grief...SO I guess I can just walk into a store and take a book and not worry about being arrested...that is exactly what she did...even though it was a public library, she checked out that book and had no intention of returning it...no different from someone walking into Wal-Mart, taking a book, and walking out of the store...way to go Lewiston...shame on you...you should have allowed the court to do the "legal" thing and throw her in jail...so much for the law...again, Shame on Lewiston officials.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Susan at August 30, 2008 1:26 PM (Suggest Removal) A lot more than a single educational book has hurt our children.
Better lock down your ps2's, your internet, tv's, radios, etc.
Kaaa-Razy Karkos will be ROBBING them from all L/A homes. I wonder if she'll have enough money to pay us for them?
She should be ashamed to keep the book herself. She's harboring porn! Dirty, old lady!
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Robert61 at August 30, 2008 2:30 PM (Suggest Removal) Get real people - please go through the local court records and make a list of every person ever brought to a criminal court for not returning a book. This was pursued because someone wanted to make a point and win - and that might not neccesarily be Ms. Karkos, but rather the library trustees and a holier than thou attitude. Make all the references you want bottom line is if I dont return a book I have to pay for it. Had the library accepted her original payment they could have avoided the entire mess...so ask yourself again, who is really pushing this fight. She only gets attention because we provide her as forum to do so and in the end its an unwinnable fight for the city. But hey lets start with putting every one in jail who doesn't return a book, then lets move on to eveyone who drops a cigarette butt in public - thats littering...should I go on, lets fill our already overcrowded and underfunded undestaffed jails with people who just dont fit our way of life. carefule what you wish for because next group might just be bloggers!
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:SURE at August 30, 2008 3:41 PM (Suggest Removal) thanks lady..... the only thing you did is make this the MOST WANTED BOOK in the entire state of maine, lmao.... thanks
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:NightCrawler at August 30, 2008 4:39 PM (Suggest Removal) Some of the analogies I've read (such as somebody stealing stuff from your home, or stealing a book from Wal Mart) are ridiculous. I've noticed that the vast majority of the people who have commented in a very negative way on this whole Karkos thing are the far left "progressive" usual suspects. THAT is why there is a divide in this country. There are those who believe in "anything goes" (thanks to the example that Bill Clinton set for us), and there are those who have core values and core beliefs that make them better prepared to be capable of drawing the line between books and pictures being "educational" or being "pornographic". Unfortunately, the Lewiston public library is not among the second group. I ask the "anything goes" Clintonistas, who want to burn Karkos at the stake, just WHERE do you "progressive" parents draw the line? Or maybe you don't HAVE a line? What sort of reading material (with or without pictures) should NOT be readily available to children at the public library? Are Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler, and magazines about bondage and group sex, or other smut magazines, OK for school-age children to hve free access to? How about books pertaining to sexual positions, "pleasure" toys, how to make bombs, how to steal somebody's identity, how to commit other crimes and get away with them, or how to obtain and use illegal drugs that give you the best high? Are those books and magazines OK? Remember, all of you "progressive" free-thinkers out there, if you DO "draw a line in the sand", then what makes YOUR line in the sand BETTER than Karkos' line in the sand? Because YOU drew it? I wonder how many of you have actually read part or all of the book in question. I bet maybe 1 or 2 of you? There is certainly a "slippery slope" that comes into play here. It's the slippery slope of HYPOCRISY.
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:sam at August 30, 2008 9:17 PM (Suggest Removal) OK here is what's going to happen. JoAn is dissatisfied that she wasn't sent to jail and she is upset that not more attention was paid to her. Therefore she will not pay the $100 fine, and she'll gain herself another coverspot on the SunJournal. This lady is bored, and needs some excitement/purpose to her end of days. Good for her, at least she seems to be entertaining you group of fools. Any other state this wouldn't even make the back pages, but her in Maine, her "crime" is the top story! Better this BS than some murder...
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:JulieL at August 30, 2008 11:24 PM (Suggest Removal) Maybe we could have a fund raiser to pay the fine for her!!!!! Now that would fry her *&&. She would have no more involvement in the case and it would be over...come on, do I hear $1?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:SCOTT at August 30, 2008 11:25 PM (Suggest Removal) Analogies or not.. going into a library with the intention of taking out a book and not returning it is plain and simply stealing NightCrawler I'm not sure why you think that is justified you fail to make your point. Maybe not going to the point of stealing is our line in the sand, but either way its OUR LINE right? Not hers and she should pay the price like everyone else has to. Making a stand for justice is one thing but making a stand like that for what you even insinuate is a personal call, is just plain a waste of time. Would you call Michelangelo's statue David pornographic? It's all just opinion what we think is appropriate here in America and stealing is definitely NOT. Karkos should pay the fine and consider herself lucky she's getting all this attention and stay in her own little corner if she don't like it. It doesn't even matter what the book portrays or shows. I'm sure anyone could find similar pictures or even stories with more graphic details a hundred times over there, or even in a hundred other places in the area. Stealing is stealing. None of us are above the law right? No matter what we believe in?
| Add your comments
|
Posted By:Suzy at August 31, 2008 11:41 AM (Suggest Removal) When I read about "It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing UP, Sex and Sexual Health", I immediately thought about the book "Gone with the Wind". Karkos reminds me of Aunt Pittypat, who faints constantly, because Scarlett is scandalising Atlanta Society. Karkos should have lived in the 19th century, not in the 21st. As a French woman, my opinion Mrs. Karkos, is that your viewpoint is very narrow-minded. Your fight is already lost, and if this book does not suit you, don't read it; but allow other readers the right to their own opinions. In France we call this “the tolerance”.
| Add your comments
|
|
Advertisement

|
 |
| “Paint Your Heart Out: Embracing Art and Healing” |
a collection of watercolor paintings, will be exhibited at the Central Maine Medical Center Rotating Art Gallery from November 7 through December 1. |
read more >>
|
| Central Maine Obstetrics-Gynecology |
is the first Midwifery Service in Maine and only the second in New England to be recognized by the American College of Nurse-Midwives with its Golden “With Women for a Lifetime” Commendation. |
read more >>
|
| Deborah Taylor |
associate director of the Central Maine Medical Center Family Medicine Residency Program, has been elected to the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine (STFM) Board of Directors. |
read more >>
|
| Erwey A. Teng, M.D. |
a pulmonologist and intensivist, has been elected to the Central Maine Medical Center Medical Staff. He is practicing with Pulmonary and Critical Care Associates in Lewiston. |
read more >>
|
| Medicare Program |
Central Maine Medical Center and SeniorsPlus will offer individual counseling for seniors who want to review their Medicare drug coverage for 2009. |
read more >>
|
|
|