Woman Faces 40 Years In Prison For Porn Popups! "Risking Injury To A Minor" - NO JOKE

[BoyAlley]

From PC World Magazine:

Julie Amero, a substitute teacher in Norwich, Connecticut, has been convicted of impairing the morals of a child and risking injury to a minor by exposing as many as ten seventh-grade students to porn sites.

The story is short: On October, 19, 2004, Amero was a substitute teacher for a seventh-grade language class at Kelly Middle School. A few students were crowded around a PC; some were giggling. She investigated and saw the kids looking at a barrage of graphic, hard-core pornographic pop-ups.

The prosecution contended that she had used the computer to visit porn sites.

The defense said that wasn't true and argued that the machine was infested with spyware and malware, and that opening the browser caused the computer to go into an endless loop of pop-ups leading to porn sites.

Amero maintains her innocence. She refused offers of a plea bargain and now faces an astounding 40 years in prison (her sentencing is on March 2).

http://blogs.pcworld.com/tipsandtwea...es/003613.html

Could Zango now be causing people to get sent to jail for 40 years?!?! This is Dramas with a capital D!

[BoyAlley]

Most of the comments from readers are right on point, too:

An incident like this lies squarely on the shoulders of the System Administrator of that school system's network. What filtering software is installed and is it configured to keep the network PC/MACs from "seeing" porn sites? Why isn't the router and firewall configuration set up to block porn and other "non-educational" sites during school hours?

[pinkz]

it is indeed a serious bone for contention

me thinks it will be issues like this that force .xxx domains upon the industry
which in a way is not a bad thing as it makes it easier to block porn from the curious gaze of minors.

[L-Pink]

Go after the spyware/malware guys ..........

[BoyAlley]

From a different new source:

Detective Mark Lounsbury, a computer crimes officer at the Norwich Police Department testified as an expert witness for the prosecution. He maintained that Amero was intentionally surfing for pornography while her seventh grade class busied itself with language arts.

Lounsbury told the court that Amero musts have "physically clicked" on pornographic links during class time in order to unleash the pornographic pictures. However, he admitted under cross-examination that the prosecution never even checked the computer for malware.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/46925/

[Quickdraw]

Originally Posted by pinkz

it is indeed a serious bone for contention

me thinks it will be issues like this that force .xxx domains upon the industry
which in a way is not a bad thing as it makes it easier to block porn from the curious gaze of minors.

Have you ever used Tools>>Internet Options>>Content>>Enable ???

.xxx is not needed to block porn. This tool is built in all modern browsers. Sites that aren't rated simply don't get through.

If that is too hard to find and use, parents can use this tool free http://www.parentalcontrolbar.org/

There is really no more excuses available for ignorance and/or laziness by parents and teachers alike.

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by Quickdraw

Have you ever used Tools>>Internet Options>>Content>>Enable ???

.xxx is not needed to block porn. This tool is built in all modern browsers. Sites that aren't rated simply don't get through.

If that is too hard to find and use, parents can use this tool free http://www.parentalcontrolbar.org/

There is really no more excuses available for ignorance and/or laziness by parents and teachers alike.

[robfantasy]

no way in hell she will get convicted

[BoyAlley]

Originally Posted by robfantasy

no way in hell she will get convicted

If you read and comprehended the brief little paragraph, you'd find out that she's ALREADY BEEN CONVICTED OF THE FOUR FELONY COUNTS.

[who]

her life is ruined now anyway conviction or not. Plus, this crap takes us one step closer to .xxx ..... it's just unbelievable.

[Hollywood376]

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

If you read and comprehended the brief little paragraph, you'd find out that she's ALREADY BEEN CONVICTED OF THE FOUR FELONY COUNTS.

what he said.

[Ayla_SquareTurtle]

god that poor woman. Hell, even if she stripped off her own clothes and started masturbating in front of the class, is that really worthy of 40 years? Some murderers dont even get that! I'm amazed that they were able to get a convincing enough computer expert to testify about possible spyware, etc on ther machine.

[LustyBucks]

This is fucking ridiculous. 40 years in prison! The absurd.

[TheSenator]

I personally know a state trooper who is on the computer crime task force. He is a complete idiot and still uses AOL to surf the Internet.

[jimthefiend]

I bet it was Zango.

[L-Pink]

I would like to see a picture of her defense attorney.

[4Man]

That is bad ........lol

[KingK7]

Hahahaha, it just does not get any more retarded than this.

[Brad]

people are retarded. it's easy as shit to control what content is available in today's browsers or through the backend. I agree that it was the IT guy's fault at the school as he/she should have taken care of this. Maybe this is actuall her lucky day, I'm sure she will get off as there will be no evidence that she even used the comp. Then she can sue for damages and fleece the tax payers for as much cash as she can get her hands on. Oh how I love the States...lol.

[pinkz]

Originally Posted by Quickdraw

Have you ever used Tools>>Internet Options>>Content>>Enable ???

.xxx is not needed to block porn. This tool is built in all modern browsers. Sites that aren't rated simply don't get through.

If that is too hard to find and use, parents can use this tool free http://www.parentalcontrolbar.org/

There is really no more excuses available for ignorance and/or laziness by parents and teachers alike.

couldnt agree more as u and i know how to use Tools>>Internet Options>>Content>>Enable
unfortunately there are many that dont, but im shure some doo goody christian government official wont see it that way and like every thing else in your life those same government officials like to be in control of it or at least think they are

[EscortBiz]

this is fucked up i bet noone on the jury understands malware or anything like that or no way in hell would they convict because there is a good chance it was infected.

there are clips all over youtube making fun of people infected with malware getting hit with fucked up popups

[Phoenix]

i hope she rots in prison...imagine...showing porn to kids

i fully back the gestapo tactics of the usa

[BoyAlley]

I just called this woman's attorney and offered my assistance should they need it. This is a HUGE injustice and can't be allowed to stand.

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by pinkz

it is indeed a serious bone for contention

me thinks it will be issues like this that force .xxx domains upon the industry
which in a way is not a bad thing as it makes it easier to block porn from the curious gaze of minors.

You have a lot to learn about .xxx If that were to go into effect, your sales would drop to about 1% of what they ever were. AOL would be the first to stop thier paying customers from visiting .xxx sites, and others would follow. It would be like AMEX not processing porn. they made a decision for thier card holders.

[RF_Erick]

She wont get 40 years. She might not even get jail time according to lawyers.
Each charge has a max of 10 years, thats how they came up with 40 years.

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

I just called this woman's attorney and offered my assistance should they need it. This is a HUGE injustice and can't be allowed to stand.

this article was posted earlier this month , you would be suprised by the amount of gfyers that didnt see anything wrong with her being convicted..

Im ashamed as an american that they have such ignorant "experts" testifying , while the qualified ones arent..
"
Lounsbury told the court that Amero musts have "physically clicked" on pornographic links during class time in order to unleash the pornographic pictures"

bullshit the guy must not know even the basics of the internet

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by RF_Erick

She wont get 40 years. She might not even get jail time according to lawyers.
Each charge has a max of 10 years, thats how they came up with 40 years.

im sure many would have said the same thing about her being convicted in the first place.. yet here we are..

[RawAlex]

Actually, there is something good to be had here. Clearly, if you can go to jail for causing popups to be displayed, then the purveyors of these popups are, well, really in trouble, no?

It would show potential injury to a person against any company that installs software to make popups, or any clever guy (hi smokey!) that comes up with ways to force popups even if someone has installed a popup blocker.

Nice.

[BoyAlley]

Originally Posted by RF_Erick

She wont get 40 years. She might not even get jail time according to lawyers.
Each charge has a max of 10 years, thats how they came up with 40 years.

I don't care if she just gets probation, she's now a CONVICTED FELON, and as such she will LOOSE HER TEACHER'S LICENSE.

[Agent 488]

should sue zango.

[96ukssob]

Thats fucked up if its not her fault. In my defense I would of said "wtf is the point of showing porn to 7th graders... they dont have credit cards to join?"

Ive used this excuse many times when I used to work at the college library while working on my sites

[sherie]

This is absurd!! By the sounds of it, her defence team did not put on the best defense either....They should have had 200 expert witnesses. And someone should hold the admins responsible for not having firewalls etc., Christ, our local libraries have more security then that!!!

I am shocked an appauled.

And Ayla AAA - If a male teacher got naked infront of his class room and started jerking off, would you have the same opinion? Come on!

[Pleasurepays]

Originally Posted by EscortBiz

this is fucked up i bet noone on the jury understands malware or anything like that or no way in hell would they convict because there is a good chance it was infected.

there are clips all over youtube making fun of people infected with malware getting hit with fucked up popups

everyone responds with remarks like this as if the defense does not have the full and complete opportunity to educate the jury.

juries aren't typically experts on armed robbery, murder, arson and rape either.. yet the system seems to work pretty well for the accused.

[Ayla_SquareTurtle]

Originally Posted by sherie

And Ayla AAA - If a male teacher got naked infront of his class room and started jerking off, would you have the same opinion? Come on!

yes I would. I think taking someones life is worse than masturbating in front of children. call me crazy. Obviously I am not condoning that behavior. It would certainly deserve strict punishment, but not a worse punishment than someone who stabs a child 37 times or some other equally horrific crime.

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

everyone responds with remarks like this as if the defense does not have the full and complete opportunity to educate the jury.

juries aren't typically experts on armed robbery, murder, arson and rape either.. yet the system seems to work pretty well for the accused.

It doesn't help when the prosecution can bring in "computer experts" who don't know shit about the Internet to make the defense look bad. What if they put you on trial for murder and brought in a "DNA expert" who didn't know shit about DNA? How can you compete?

[pocketkangaroo]

She should have just fucked a couple kids in the class. If she was hot, she'd just get some probation if she said she was bi-polar or something.

[sherie]

Originally Posted by Ayla_AAA

yes I would. I think taking someones life is worse than masturbating in front of children. call me crazy. Obviously I am not condoning that behavior. It would certainly deserve strict punishment, but not a worse punishment than someone who stabs a child 37 times or some other equally horrific crime.

They are completely different crimes. It's not like she got 40 years, it's the max that she could get. Just like those who commit murder, the maximum sentence's are usually life without the possibility of parole (depending on what the charge is) Who know's what one would get charged with if they ended up getting naked and masterbating in front of a classroom full of children.

Either way, it's ridiculous. And is like compairing apple's to orange's. I just wanted to see where you stood.

The fact that she was even convicted is asinine, I agree with those sentiments!

[EscortBiz]

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

everyone responds with remarks like this as if the defense does not have the full and complete opportunity to educate the jury.

juries aren't typically experts on armed robbery, murder, arson and rape either.. yet the system seems to work pretty well for the accused.

Again you are comparing things that anyone can understand to something that if you persoanlly did not have experience with it you wont believe it.

For example since the start of time people have been murdered and robbed etc would a jury believe a story such as ?the gun just went off by me simply touching the hostler?

Try explaining your dad or someone who has personally never experienced things just popping up on their computer without doing anything, noone would believe you.

I don?t know her I didn?t study the case and I wasn?t present at the trial and neither where you, my point is there is a very very good chance that it was spyware, heck what if the janitor used that computer the night before to surf, so many ways shit could of happened.

If even one person on the jury would of experienced spyware she would not of been convicted.

Now maybe there is more to it, maybe she was sitting there talking about the porn to the kids, im talking based on the story in the papers.

[TG Rebecca]

WOW, that is crazy. i sure hope she doesn't get found guilty. sooo ridiculous.

[sherie]

Originally Posted by TG Rebecca

WOW, that is crazy. i sure hope she doesn't get found guilty. sooo ridiculous.

That's the problem, she WAS found guilty, she WAS convicted.

People, you need to read the thread headliner before commenting lol

[ayne468]

Yeah, it will be interesting to see what happens on this one...there is always the chance that they will want to make an example of her, by giving her a max sentance to try and deter others! 40 years does seem quite extreme though...however if she was looking at porn whilst teaching, well thats just wrong!!!!!

[Luscious Media]

Unfortunately this is all happening in my home town. The fact that it was a laptop and not a PC makes me wonder what was actually on it. Did she ever take it home? Did others have access to it? A friend and fellow educator was quoted as saying she felt the kids had actually got on the computer and caused the problem in the first place.

Did she do something wrong? Probably not. Will she do 40 years? Probably not. Did the system railroad her? Probably.

If she's truly innocent she can appeal (hopefully with a better attorney), and if she wins, she can sue.

The sad thing is, the Norwich police have no clue and should never be considered expert witnesses when it comes to computers and the internet. I would offer my help but I'm more concerned about being labeled a degenerate or worse, being thrown in jail.

[Webby]

Another example of more idiots in action - this time in the criminal justice system. Damn.. they are everywhere