2 recommendations |
Teacher could get 40 years because of spyware porn pop-upsThis is really disgusting. A Connecticut teacher has been convicted of exposing middle school students to pornography because the spyware infested classroom computer she used started spewing porn pop-ups. The prosecutor claimed the teacher "must" have clicked on the porn sites. Obviously, the prosecutor hasn't experienced a browser hijacking before. What happened to the teacher would have happened to anyone who used the infected machine. Now, the 40 year old teacher's reputation is shot and she could face up to 40 years in jail. Let's hope this conviction gets overturned. Maybe the anti-spyware community could lend a hand. » sunbeltblog.blogspot.com ··· ice.html |
|
|
EliteKiss My Ass join:2002-10-03 New Haven, CT |
Elite
Member
2007-Jan-10 9:14 pm
Prosecutor must use a Mac... |
|
Dustyn Premium Member join:2003-02-26 Ontario, CAN |
Dustyn
Premium Member
2007-Jan-10 9:20 pm
Or Linux... |
|
justin..needs sleep Mod join:1999-05-28 2031
1 recommendation |
to wehooper
sounds like more than enough grounds for a re-trial/appeal. |
|
Dustyn Premium Member join:2003-02-26 Ontario, CAN ·Carry Telecom ·TekSavvy Cable Asus GT-AX11000 Technicolor TC4400
1 edit |
Dustyn
Premium Member
2007-Jan-10 9:31 pm
said by justin:sounds like more than enough grounds for a re-trial/appeal. Agreed. A judge allegedly falling asleep during the proceedings and reports of the jurors discussing the case outside the courts at a local restaurant is compelling enough to call a mistrial. |
|
hpguruCurb Your Dogma Premium Member join:2002-04-12 |
to Dustyn
Or a porn popping spyware infected hardcore jpeg choked Win box. |
|
KyeU join:2003-12-31 Canada 4 edits
1 recommendation |
to wehooper
Who is liable in this case? I can think that the School Administration is liable for not renewing the content-filtering software, and/or for not spending the necessary resources to secure the school computers (and for not outlining it in guidelines that infected computers are NOT to be used). quote: Amero also testified she had told at least four teachers and the assistant principal at the school about the problem, but received no help.
Incompetent administration. EDIT: And even if she happens to have a "thing" for pornography, the administration can be put to blame for having lax supply teacher entrance evaluations. EDIT 2: quote: But Smith countered Horner's testimony with that of Norwich Police Detective Mark Lounsbury, a computer crimes investigator. On a projected image of the list of Web sites visited while Amero was working, Lounsbury pointed out several highlighted links.
"You have to physically click on it to get to those sites," Smith said. "I think the evidence is overwhelming that she did intend to access those Web sites."
OR you can have spyware load those pages, where IE marks them as visited even if you didn't physically click on them (tested this by making a simple HTML page with a link to Yahoo.com, then in a new window, I went to Yahoo.com. I then refreshed the simple HTML page and it shows up as being visited (purple instead of blue)). The evidence is in fact overwhelming that she did NOT intend to access those Web sites. It's sad that an 18 year old (myself) can poke holes in a Police Detective's accusation. There's no mention of the Police Detective scanning the computer for malware/crapware/spyware. By reading the articles and having the prosecutor insisting that she had HAD to click on the links is despicable. It seems like malware/crapware/spyware doesn't exist in Connecticut. |
|
psicopMore human than human Premium Member join:2005-12-21 Australia |
to wehooper
Don't blame the teacher. It could have been a naughty student(s). More responsible is the school, more specifically the IT stuff for not doing THEIR JOB, which is blocking the network from accessing pornographic pages. The public prosecutor must be on drugs. 40 years??? Ridiculous. |
|
La LunaFly With The Angels My Beloved Son Chris Premium Member join:2001-07-12 New Port Richey, FL |
to wehooper
Wow...the school doesn't protect their computers and the teacher gets nailed for it? WTF?
Maybe all teachers everywhere should start refusing to use school computers in the classroom....obviously, there's no guarantee the schools even bother with basic security and if it could happen to one teacher, it could happen to any of them. |
|
La Luna |
to psicop
said by psicop:Don't blame the teacher. It could have been a naughty student(s).... The article states the teacher opened a webpage about "hairdressing" that started the popups. |
|
psicopMore human than human Premium Member join:2005-12-21 Australia |
psicop
Premium Member
2007-Jan-10 11:36 pm
Yeah, I should have read the link. Well, I just finished reading it...and buff! The whole case stinks: 1. The school? (I guess the network) did have content filtering but the license was expired. 2. The Trial Judge, Hillary Strackbein, was seen falling asleep during proceedings... 3. And made comments to the jury that she wanted the case over by the end of the week... 4. Judge Strackbein attempted to pressure the defense into an unwanted plea deal, in place of a trial... 5. Jurors had discussed the case at a local restaurant. Bloody funny. Problem is that the teacher's reputation is in tatters after this. |
|
|
Temblor to justin
Anon
2007-Jan-11 1:01 am
to justin
said by justin:sounds like more than enough grounds for a re-trial/appeal. More like enough grounds to hang the prosecutor from the nearest street lamp. Prosecutors are granted immunity from 'the law,' not from extra-judicial executions carried out by the people. |
|
La LunaFly With The Angels My Beloved Son Chris Premium Member join:2001-07-12 New Port Richey, FL |
to psicop
said by psicop:Yeah, I should have read the link.... Ya' think? Really, this isn't funny though, this poor woman could go to jail for this. |
|
ff1324Everybody Goes Home Premium Member join:2002-08-24 On Four Day |
ff1324
Premium Member
2007-Jan-11 3:18 pm
said by La Luna:Really, this isn't funny though, this poor woman could go to jail for this. This should be a wake up call to everyone who works in any place where questionable content could affect your employment status as well as criminal complaints. In any place but your own house (read: your workplace) a string of porn pop-ups could be construed as sexual harassment. |
|
EGeezer Premium Member join:2002-08-04 Midwest |
to wehooper
I'd say the defense attorney was incompetent if (s)he failed to file for discovery of all forensic evidence and have that evidence analysed by experts certified in Encase or fo4ensic analysis.
The defense should have called on the prosecution witness to prove that the links could not have been accessed by automated processes, and provided a demonstration of a typical porn popup spyware infested PC.
If what I read in the story is correct and there are no other unreported related facts, there's grounds for a retrial.
As others have said, regardless of the outcome, the accused will still suffer being referred to as "the accused porn peddling teacher". |
|
Alcohol Premium Member join:2003-05-26 Climax, MI |
to wehooper
40 years in jail?
What's the charge for murder? Child Pornography?
Great justice system |
|
javaManThe Dude abides. MVM join:2002-07-15 San Luis Obispo, CA |
to psicop
said by psicop:. . . Problem is that the teacher's reputation is in tatters after this. Nothing that a retrial and an acquittal wouldn't fix though. There are more than enough people around who understand how things like this can happen even though the judge, jury, prosecutor and "investigator" apparently don't. She might consider hiring a better attorney though. |
|
MarkAWBarry White Premium Member join:2001-08-27 Canada |
to wehooper
"Was justice done here?" Hell no for starters the detective who was in charge of the investigation admits "there was no search made for adware, which can generate pop-up advertisements". so how was justice served.
Then there is the judge who was seen falling asleep during proceedings and made comments to the jury that she wanted the case over by the end of the week. It was also reported that Judge Strackbein attempted to pressure the defense into an unwanted plea deal, in place of a trial. The defense attorney for Amero, moved for a mistrial shortly before closing arguments Friday, based on reports that jurors had discussed the case at a local restaurant. I'd say the judge should be taken off the bench and placed on trial for impersonating a judge.
"A bad spyware infestation can splatter a machine full of porn popups and its a bit unnerving to think that a teacher could get hard prison time for something that was likely to have been completely innocent."
Duh! |
|
Blue2 Premium Member join:2004-04-14 France 1 edit |
to wehooper
There are a few things about this story I still don't get.
The local Connecticut newspaper states, "Still, she was accused and convicted of intentionally accessing several pornographic sites -- not pop-up ads or windows, as she suggested. And she did not turn off the computer when the students saw the images."
- How did they prove "intention"? - How did they prove she was the one who accessed these sites? (The computer was in a room under lock and key that only she had access to?) - Did any student testify that they saw her click on a link or type in the URL to a pornographic site? Since the students were obviously watching at the time (according to this quote), what exactly did they see her do? - And finally, not to be too sexist about this, but how many 40 year old women do you know who access porn sites, at school no less, unless there is a more significant underlying problem (e.g. a sexual predator hoping to get a reaction)?
This perhaps shows that a prosecutor wanting to set an example or make a name for himself, a computer-illiterate judge, and a bad defense lawyer can be dangerous to your health.
Just my two cents. |
|
thender2Glamour Profession Premium Member join:2004-05-16 Staten Island, NY 1 edit |
to wehooper
The only person liable is the person who made the spyware.
As for exposing "kids" to porn.. how many haven't seen porn in middle school? If anything the kids are probably getting a kick out of the fact that a big deal, or any deal is being made over this.. I didn't know a single person in middle school who hadn't seen porn before someplace. A good portion of my 7th grade classmates used the computer class to find ways around the stupid filters to look at porn anyway. |
|
javaManThe Dude abides. MVM join:2002-07-15 San Luis Obispo, CA |
to Blue2
said by Blue2:. . . This perhaps shows that a prosecutor wanting to set an example or make a name for himself, a computer-illiterate judge, and a bad defense lawyer can be dangerous to your health. That sounds about right to me. |
|
your moderator at work
hidden :
|
winsyrstrifeRiver City Bounce Premium Member join:2002-04-30 Brooklyn, NY |
to wehooper
Re: Teacher could get 40 years because of spyware porn pop-upsI can hear the IT dept. huddling in the server room, trying to get over the shock of the middle school students easily disabling their "secure" system. Kids are too smart for their own good these days. There are frivolous lawsuits everyday. This is definitely not one of them. I'd sue someone for all they're worth. |
|
KTW35 join:2003-01-12 Port Saint Lucie, FL |
to wehooper
Unless aliens take over the proceedings: she will be found not guilty. "If" she has a good lawyer she will get "paid". All I have to say. |
|
ElJay join:2004-03-17 Portland, ME Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Lite Ubiquiti Unifi UAP-AC-LITE
|
to wehooper
This is nuts... No search for adware? What sort of justice is this? Too bad the jury and the school's IT people can't be put on trial for being idiots.
My experience in school was that the "computer" people there were incompetent and could barely figure out how to plug an ethernet cable into a computer. I bet it is no different at this school, and it's really ridiculous with tools like group policy and on-access virus/malware scanners that they apparently allowed a computer to get owned by adware. |
|
Blue2 Premium Member join:2004-04-14 France |
to wehooper
Innocent people do sometimes get faulted, ESPECIALLY when the people making these decisions have no clue as to how technology works. Someone has to be held responsible: the school/bank/institution (unlikely), the kids (not a chance), the user (bingo!).
Before making a ruling on a computer related case, every judge should be forced to (a) pass a basic computer literacy test and (b) spend a week behind an unprotected computer.
After that, there would be a lot less chance for misapplications of justice. |
|
|
nonus to wehooper
Anon
2007-Jan-12 11:21 am
to wehooper
this kind of ridiculous case can only happen in US, every minute thing can exaggerated to lawsuit in court. |
|
|
|
|
Blue2 Premium Member join:2004-04-14 France |
Blue2
Premium Member
2007-Jan-12 12:02 pm
Voila: Garbage In, Garbage Out |
|
TechyDad Premium Member join:2001-07-13 USA
1 recommendation |
to Kurts3Kids
I really feel sad for her and hope that she wins on appeal, but now that she has been found guilty, her career is likely over. Even if she's acquitted on appeal, she'll be known as the teacher that showed porn to her kids. No school district will want to hire her. |
|