[i]Oct. 19, 2004, while substituting for a seventh-grade language class at Kelly Middle School, Julie Amero claimed she could not control the graphic images appearing in an endless cycle on her computer… Computer expert W. Herbert Horner, testifying in Amero’s defense, said he found spyware on the computer and an innocent hair styling Web site "that led to this pornographic loop that was out of control.
[/i]
Everyone agrees, this draconian sentence is a travesty of justice.
Thank you for that, a very interresting and real life look at what can and does happen. I am still undecided as to what happened. What I am surprised at is this, there is such lacking evidence on both sides, so many gaps, how can a decision be made like this? I am not even saying she IS innocent or not, but there isn’t enough to determine either way. Now, the biggest issue aside from the woman facing years of time for nothing is this…
When will the United States get judges who are under 90 and actually understand computer concepts? Too often judges make decisions in technology cases and have no clue what they are doing. This is a problem that needs to be touched on as well. I do think this judge just wanted this one under his belt and to please some uptight parents.
My final statement is that the School or admin should be liable for this either way. There is NO reason NOT to have anti-virus, AVG , AVAST, CAV, all free and if the admin didn’t know of these, he shouldn’t be an admin at all. The anti-virus running out was no excuse on the school’s part at all.
This is very upsetting, and this is another reason why you never trust a Windows based system… (now to a more serious point…)
It was clearly not here fault, especially if they have proven that the malware was present before she got there. In the end it gives another reason to be cautious on the web.
Not so clearly Mr. J. Why? If going by the article, it does not state the regular user OR her could have accessed the sites previously. Why would a child go to a hair site and then Crayola? Perhaps someone used the pc then a student came in and went to a Crayola site. Ok, they suspect student involvment from this? In what way? A student would not probably go to a hair site and then Crayola.
I don’t know a 7th grader who would go to a Crayola site. Not these days for sure so I think that’s bogus or someone purposlely did that to make it look like a student not realizing 7th graders don’t browse crayola sites. Unless younger children had access to this pc other wise, nah uh.
She could have accessed the pc prior as well, there is no proof she didn’t or did.Horner is stating spyware caused the porn sites to pop up, bogus sites etc…well, the same can be said for those who go on porn sites, you get more porn sites, ads from all over and if you click the ad off, it’ll take you to another porn site, another rotten site, back to porn, etc… This to me isn’t clear either way and could be a circle, not just one opened the other, porn opened hair site, hair site opened porn. Same for infection\spyware\malware, this could also come from accessing porn sites and cause the same vicious circle.
Why keep trying to click off porn windows pushing students heads away , shut off the pc or shut off the monitor. She may have panicked in this scenario, that’s always a possibility and happens all the time.
Ok, Malware was on the pc before she got there, who’s to say she wasn’t on the pc another time? Who’s to say she was?
My point here even if it sounds like I agree with the sentence is actually opposite. There is not enough evidence in ANY way to suggest right now, “according to the article” that she is guilty or not. No final judgement should have been made. It’s fine the parents were upset, however they must be high classed or whiny attention hungry types looking for the big payoff, because by 7th grade even back when I was growing up, there wasn’t a kid that didn’t know all this or see it somehow so that’s a crock. These kids nowadays know even more at younger ages. I don’t agree with it, I don’t think it’s right but come on, don’t tell me their kids are scarred, they probably went home with a smile on their face laughing to eachother.
The original guy who checked the pc doesn’t sound qualified enough to download free software let alone make a judgment.
In my “personal” opinion and feeling, I think she’s innocent, but as I said, until they get everything together who can say?