If you have never heard of this case, here is a summary of the events leading to the conviction:
In October 2004, substitute teacher Julie Amero finds out that porn pop-ups are showing up, and she is unable to stop it. Earlier, she was told by an IT guy to not turn off the computer (which she does not know how to). She tries to prevent the children from looking at the porn-filled monitor and asks for help from others. After complaints from parents, Amero is arrested for "risk of injury to a minor." She maintains her innocence, but the judge and the jury do not see it her way. She is guilty because of evidence that shows that Amero went into the porn websites. They neglect to consider the fact that the evidence does not show whether if the websites came from going directly there or from pop-ups. She is going to be sentenced on March 29 and she could possibly be given a 40-year sentence. Do you think that she is guilty? Do you think that she deserves going to prison?

I really believe that she is innocent. The so-called evidence that the prosecution gave does not show that she deliberately went into porn websites. Some say that she didn't do anything to prevent this from being exposed to the children, but they neglect to consider that she might have panicked. Should some be convicted for panicking or being tech-illiterate? I don't think so.

-----
UPDATE: Amero's sentencing has been moved to April 26. This would be the second time in March that her sentencing has been moved.

-----
UPDATE 2: Amero's sentencing has been moved (again) to May 18.

-----
UPDATE 3: Amero's sentencing has been moved (yet again) to June 6.

-----
UPDATE 4: After months of delay, the Amero's sentence has been overturned and has been given a new trial. She has pleaded not guilty.

well i believe tt she is innocent, and tt the fact tt they should have check thoroughly and not just point fingers

IMHO she is innocent - nobody knows (at least "normal people") what the SW really does on the internet.

I'm sorry, i'm dumb and i voted "yes".

Whether she went to the sites or not at another time, I'd be pretty sure she didn't go onto the sites in the presence of the children. If she was browsing porn at work at another time and accidentally downloaded some viruses, sure it was irresponsible, but that doesn't imply she had intent of the crimes she is being charged of.

In any case a "crime" like this doesn't deserve even close to 40 years prison. However the number of cases that I hear about where the truth is never found is shockingly huge.

Well if she's a grown up adult, there shouldn't be a problem for her accesing the sites.
Well beyond that point, if she truely doesn't know how to use a computer, how in the world is she going to use the internet?

Even I get weird advertisements.... well not porn but some weird ones

I don't know if she's innocent or not but I think the police should have checked to be sure. They shouldn't just assume like that.

There're 2 times when I went on a upload manga website and then my computer was infected with virus and all kind of pop-ups showed up, included porn ones, too.

If I were her and the prosecutor is unable to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that:
1. She deliberately visited a porn site and the pop ups were not the result of another non-porn site
2. She deliberately allowed the children to see it
then I would sue the school, city, and state for wrongful prosecution.

Seems like a pretty clear case of 'how did that pop up get there?'

It doesn't mean she was the one to look at such sites, but they can certainly pop in and cause problems later.
Take my box...I stumbled onto something once and got out when I realized where it had sent me, but now everytime I click a Google link it redirects my path from a game or anime site I may have been searching to porn or a business site or wherever. Stuff like this happens, and she seemed to do whatever she could to try and block the impact. She just wasn't tech-savvy enough to deal with the situation

She did everything she was supposed to do under the circumstances. I'm amazed at how cruel uninformed parents can be.

well yes, parents are ignorant alot of the time. i bet they don't even know what their kids watch when they're not around.. but on the case of the teacher, i don't think she should be procecuted at all. let alone 40rs! thats madness! People who kill people get off at 25, why on earth should that be concidered a worse offence? geeez....

Quote by Shadowdawnwell yes, parents are ignorant alot of the time. i bet they don't even know what their kids watch when they're not around.. but on the case of the teacher, i don't think she should be procecuted at all. let alone 40rs! thats madness! People who kill people get off at 25, why on earth should that be concidered a worse offence? geeez....

That's the way that this country's judicial system works, it seems. Why would Amero be facing 40 years in prison? Because she was convicted of four counts of "risk of injury to a minor." Since this carries a maximum sentence of 10 years, 4 counts * 10 years = 40 years. What is also ridiculous is that the school system where she was working does not get any blame for this incident. Shouldn't the school have filtered those sites? Shouldn't the school have updated their software to prevent this from happening? Considering that she was tech-illiterate, there would have been no way for her to get into the porn sites (if the school had been paying attention to their computers).

Quote by KamikazeKoga

Quote by Shadowdawnwell yes, parents are ignorant alot of the time. i bet they don't even know what their kids watch when they're not around.. but on the case of the teacher, i don't think she should be procecuted at all. let alone 40rs! thats madness! People who kill people get off at 25, why on earth should that be concidered a worse offence? geeez....

That's the way that this country's judicial system works, it seems. Why would Amero be facing 40 years in prison? Because she was convicted of four counts of "risk of injury to a minor." Since this carries a maximum sentence of 10 years, 4 counts * 10 years = 40 years. What is also ridiculous is that the school system where she was working does not get any blame for this incident. Shouldn't the school have filtered those sites? Shouldn't the school have updated their software to prevent this from happening? Considering that she was tech-illiterate, there would have been no way for her to get into the porn sites (if the school had been paying attention to their computers).

Exactly, schools are supposed to block that kind of content. So if the school has these blocks in place there should have been no way to view porn on the school computer. And she should have just ignored the person that told her not to turn off the PC and pulled the plug. Yeah, it will have to rebooted when restarted but thems the breaks. So she didn't even think of that which is probably why the court didn't believe her.

But 40 years? Forget killers, we have actual child rapists that get less time in jail. It's not like she forced the kids to sit down and look at the PC. Maybe if she did her sentence would have been lighter. Seems fail to do your job protecting kids and they'll throw the book at you. Actually mentally and physically harm kids and the system and liberal activist judges will sympathsize with you for some reason.

I work with university lecturers and sometimes it still surprises me how computer illiterate they are. In one case a lecturer's computer was infected with spyware and all types of stuff popped up - she was nearly in tears. If that was in a classroom then Julie Amero's jury would have given her a worse sentence.

A way to big proportion of proffesional people are still too computer illiterate to react rationally in cases like these, and when you are in front of a class of students (and you being substiute teacher no less), then you are bound to panic.

Quote by DuuzBut 40 years? Forget killers, we have actual child rapists that get less time in jail. It's not like she forced the kids to sit down and look at the PC. Maybe if she did her sentence would have been lighter. Seems fail to do your job protecting kids and they'll throw the book at you. Actually mentally and physically harm kids and the system and liberal activist judges will sympathsize with you for some reason.

Exactly! I just read in the paper that a guy killed a 17 year old kid for breaking in his car, and he's only gonna get 15 years! (given this happened here, SA, not in USA).

Wow. Talk about your f*cked up laws.

MAAAAAAANNNNNNN I hate the judicial system. Yes, you heard me. I hate the unjust system of 'justice'.

ONE! She was a SUBSTITUTE teacher. A SUB! It's a well known fact that sub don't know sh*t about regular school life and therefore not know the condition of the computers too well.

TWO! It's a POP-UP! The parents involved in this must have been technophobic retards and have never had to deal with the internet at ALL in their lifetime because pop-ups are UNA-F*CKING-VOIDABLE! If they're that Amish, why are they sending their children to schools when they could be building barns and other forms of forced and free child labour?

THREE! This is where the real deep point comes.
ZOMFG PR0N!111one

All of the sudden, after seeing those pop-ups, those children look down at their bodies and scream bloody murder upon discovering the sexual organs that AUTOMATICALLY popped up on-screen they ALREADY F*CKING HAD! HOLY SH*T!

PENIS! VAGINA! Wow, that wasn't so terrible, was it? I just named two organs of the body that YOU WOULDN'T BE HERE WITHOUT! Yet these are the very same things that the government and society are trying to hide from our youth. My question is WHY?!?

What will censoring nature achieve exactly? What is so horrible about organic life? We don't need McDonalds preservatives shoved up our ass to live, you know?

Sex should be celebrated! (at very least of all EDUCATED, instead of some old grump just telling us to not have it.)

How the hell does this shi*t even end up in court?!?

Now, If I (ME) were in charge of the judicial system...

The court rooms would be GIANT POSTERS OF PORN! That way, these sissy, fear-ridden, dumbf*ck parents are going to stay the hell away because they're so offended by reality.

Also, every complaint taken at the courthouse will result in the complainee getting a tattoo on their forehead stating "FLASH ME!".

Summing up, what this teacher accidentally showed these children were human bodies, just like everyone else. (Unless the pop-ups showed a girl getting raped by a rhino or something). A woman undressing, to me, would be like the unveiling of the Mona Lisa. A masterpiece of great grace and beauty.

The human body and the act of *gasp* sex are works of art. They are not monstrosities that need to be eradicated.

And if this post somehow reaches those parents (which I think is impossible, since they're Amish), I hope you feel as stupid as you are.

Grow up, so maybe the next generation will have a chance to.

well what I think is that the people that sentence her for 40 years is absurd it's just a freakin pop up so what's the big deal. it's not like a murder or something like that

I think she is innocent because there are not enough proofs that she did that! Anyways what could she do if she was desperate and didnt know much about computers

Cast in the name of Ender: she\'s not guilty.
I think they're overreacting. There is much worse cases to see to, not only teachers who can't handle porn popups and asks children for help. It is clear that she isn't guilty - how can we blame her for just that she couln't handle some porn popups? And if they sentence her, they should also sentence all the people that made the popups - it was theyre fault, they was direct cause of the fact, that children seen porn.
So no, she shoudn't be sentenced.

hahaha aww man, must be real bad for her
why was she watching porn again? sheesh..
but i think she is innocent...poor teacher, they should have trained them to react better in such situations!

I firmly believe she's innocent. Thare are porn pop ups that direct you to the website immediately, without being able to stop it, which of course just keeps them going and going and going, and not everyone is literate in computers.

Forty years is a bit much for something that simple as it is.

well i did a little research on this as this is the 1st time for have heard of it.

took place in a middle school in Connecticut
substitute not pc savvy
pc running on windows 98 and IE
pc was infected with malware/spyware
told Not to turn pc off
pc expert's testimony [found malware on pc] barred from trial.
facing up to 40 years- i.e rapists only get a few years. !

she must have the most incompetent lawyer that ever lived.

if she is sentenced to jail time this would be an incredible travesty of justice.
she would appeal and with a decent lawyer should beat the rap.

she should then sue: the school district, Microsoft, the Justice Dept. [District Attorney] & the malware/spyware authors.

crap like this i would expect in say Russia or China; etc. not America.

personal note: i have used pc's at work running on IE that were infected with malware and those ads can go crazy. i.e windows constantly opening etc.

of course at home i run Firefox and keep my system locked down like Fort Knox. ;

40 YEARS IS WAAAAAAY BEYOND EXCESIVE, if she is found guilty and I were the judge, I wouldn't condem her to more that community work.

That the pop-us appearing indicates that someone actually went into adult sites in THAT computer, but they still have to prove that she actually went into those porn sites.

AFTER that they still have to PROVE that she showed to the kids by her own will, wich I doubt, by the way she panicked.

Someone "exalted" acussed the teacher for sure. I dopubt she will be condemned, but it'll be a pain in the butt for her during the next months.

I have always tougth that the major bless and curse in the US is that anyone can be accused for the most insignificant thing.

ehh I haven't heard of this news yet
but running into adult pop-ups are such annoying cases
especially when it's shown in public.
That's why we use mozilla firefox!

Innocent!
there shouldn't be a crime for aperverted stupid teacher! that can't turn off the pc!

"She"...

Is this the "sex education"? ...In many western countries it is

to be taken in actions well

but don't exclude the psychological crime ...

more seriously, Hantai is called...that often aim at puples...

woman is rare and most are evil men...