6th June 2007

New trial

posted in Uncategorized |

I wrote about Julie Amero’s case before, in Pop-Up Hell.  The gist:  a substitute school teacher clicks on an innocent link during before-class free time and immediately gets sent into pop-up hell.  Panicked, and previously told to never turn off the computer, she tries her best to keep the p0rn from being viewed by her students, and seeks out help.  No-one helps her, but the school fires her a few days later, and then she is put on trial for endangering children, convicted, and subject to up to 40 years in prison.

While discussing a similar case on a debate board just yesterday, I mentioned Julie Amero.  Reminded, I decided to see what was up with her case. 

Lo and behold, I discovered that, after sentencing was postponed twice, today was to be the day.

Today, the judge remanded her case to a new trial, saying that “erroneous information” may have been presented in her previous trial.  Really?  You think so?

In the decision, the judge made a passing swipe at bloggers, who she said “tried to improperly influence the court”.

Well, okay.  Fifty kazillion appalled IT support pros, who know what its like for newbies to be confronted by a porn pop-up loop, flooded her inbox and blog sites with detailed commentary describing what can happen in that case and blasting the prosecutors’ “expert” witnesses.  If you’re going to call that “trying to improperly influence the court”, then, judge, we’re guilty as charged.  Does anyone think that if those IT pros hadn’t done the writing and emailing and telephone calling that Julie Amero’s case would have ended the same way?  I don’t.

Mind you, I’m not defending any teacher (or other professional) who consciously decides to surf p0rn websites at school (or place of work).  But the situation this lady described has happened to me, and happened to people I work with, and happened to other people I know.  The thought of being potentially sentenced to 40 years in prison for accidentally opening a pop-up loop made my hair stand on end.

Technorati: , , ,

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 6th, 2007 at 8:19 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

There are currently 7 responses to “New trial”

  1. 1 On June 7th, 2007, Julie Pippert said:

    My gosh…the judge said that? I’m with you on this.

  2. 2 On June 7th, 2007, Lauri said:

    yikes… that is really scary… who has not had that experience?

  3. 3 On June 7th, 2007, Mamacita said:

    Good thing Nancy Grace didn’t get ahold of her!

  4. 4 On June 7th, 2007, Spacemom said:

    I had that happen 10 years ago, second day on the job on a government computer. I nearly had a heart attack on all of that.

    I couldnot imagine a female sub looking at porn at school. Seriously, I can’t. Sigh….

  5. 5 On June 7th, 2007, carosgram said:

    I am so glad our school district blocks all pop-ups.

  6. 6 On June 8th, 2007, Lululu said:

    I wish they would prosecute all the stupid pop-up spammers. Think of all the time that is wasted on that garbage!

  7. 7 On June 10th, 2007, omegamom said:

    Julie–Yup; apparently the judge didn’t like the commentary…

    Laurie–As a helpdesk person, I saw things like that all the time.

    Mamacita–Har!

    Spacemom–I couldn’t imagine a female sub doing it either, but I’m sure some do.

    Carosgram–The thing is they *had* a blocker, but hadn’t renewed the license!

    Lululu–They’re working on it–at least with email spammers.

Leave a Reply