Smut pop-up teacher case finally resolved with misdemeanor plea

The first thing we do ...

According to Alex's latest blog entry, the later prosecutor now admits that the computer may not have been examined properly by the local police.

And they think they may still have had a case.

Which is a bunch of bluster, imo - if they were confident of a conviction, wouldn't they have gone to trial?

http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/connecticut-still-believes-amero-is.html

"For some reason, this case caught the media's attention." Yeah, because you people are a bunch of idiots who know nothing about technology or justice.

What Planet is the Judge from

Why did the judge accept her guilty plea ? she plainly had evidence of wrong doing planted on her computer by others unknown. This sets a Very Very dangerous precedent. Anybody who doesn't like you or want to discredit you can and will do the same. What happened to due process ?

Even the misdemeanor should be expunged!

A modern version of New England injustice reminiscent of the Salem witch trials?

Both the prosecutor and the judge in this case have already been promoted within the system, and, apparently, Julie Amero may never be able to fully clear her name. This case is not even on the Connecticut Division of Criminal Justice web site; everyone should email the state's Attorney General conndcj@po.state.ct.us - Kevin Kane

disgusting...

...or beyond disgusting. The lengths that people in power will go to protect the guilty (and I don't mean the poor befuddled teacher whose life is now probably in shambles!)

Think of the children is all well and good, but why aren't people blaming the real culprit here? [see icon chosen...]

Sitaram

PS: On the plus side, a recent personal experience of mine indicates that even semi-literate people running internet cafe's in India seem to have wised up to the need to use FF instead of IE, so maybe there's hope for this world after all... I mean how difficult can it be for teachers in the so-called "first world" to get the same message?

She Was Wrongly Accused

Hello,

As a security advisor, my personal opinion is that this case should of been against the school in question, not against the teacher. For a start, she was only a substitute, therefor she is not a PERMENANT member of the schools staff and therefor not completely trained and informed on the system(s) the school in question had running.

Spyware & Adware are malicious, hence why there are so many tools to stop them, but they are there to do the job they was programmed to do, which is get round these filters...hence why we call them malicious...if they saw a firewall, adware blocker, spyware blocker etc...and just stopped in their tracks they would be called friendly...and that is the exact opposite and therefor its just plain daft that a case could even be brought to trial, let-alone actually prosecute her AND revoke her teaching licence.

Can't these lawyers and prosecutors just stop and think for a moment rather than just thinking 'Oh my word, I am going to get paid so much for this, I don't care if she is innocent'.

Cases like this are exactly why we have murderers, rapists, peodophiles etc...walking our streets...because the law doesnt care about these people, all lawyers care about is money, and money alone...they will lie through their teeth and say someone is innocent if they offer them enough money even if there is outstanding evidence to the contrary...it could literally be something as major as a VIDEO+AUDIO Recording of the event taking place showing that person was there, but this evidence will be pushed aside for the right price.

I say re-instate her Licence, refund her the money she paid as a fine and give the lady some compensation and a VERY public appology! She did nothing wrong, the school did, and its their Principle, and their Tech Staff that should be in court for it as it was their fault this happened in the first place!

Stephen Jones

KC Tech®

Computer and Internet Security Advisor