Horror story of a substitute teacher right here in my home state tried & (wrongly) convicted on several counts of Risk of Injury to a Minor & faced 40 years in prison. Her conviction was overturned over a year ago. Why won't Connecticut leave her alone?
Saturday July 12, 2008, 2:38 am
You MUST read these follow-ups to fully understand the full nightmare of her current situation. Her conviction was based on computer illiteracy, shoddy police work and evidence from "computer experts" that was incredibly flawed.
Now Julie is free - but not really. You see, the state won't dismiss the charges, and they won't try her. So Julie is living in limbo, having suffered a miscarriage, a breakdown and unable to work because now no one will hire her to do ANYTHING. This is despicable, and could happen to any of us given the right circumstances. PLEASE read:
Saturday July 12, 2008, 3:06 am
I remember this, I still think she should sue them all.
common sense told you the kid was a brat and just mad at this woman.
But there I go again expecting people to have common sense.
Thanks Cate
Saturday July 12, 2008, 3:28 am
Kathy....Since I've been on Care2 I've come to realize man has no common sense. If you really think about it only animals do. We are the most self serving selfish egotistical lot on earth.
Animals are not..............And God speed relief & justice for this woman!!
Saturday July 12, 2008, 4:35 am
This is a case that should never have gone to trial. We can only hope that her case will be dismissed and soon. She should sue the Norwich Police Department and Detective Mark Lounsbury. It's incredible that he would be their "expert", and the prosecution simply dismissed Mr. Homer, a true computer expert.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 6:00 am
This is a horrible situation and I pray this womans nightmare ends soon. My heart goes out to her. I am not fond of school and judicial systems anymore.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 7:00 am
I was looking for a particular brand modem to purchase for my Internet connection, and when I tpyed in the name of the modem in the address bar it suddenly brought me to a porno site. I could not believe that a porno site was hidden in the modem's address line. I deleted it immediately, and reported the incident to the modem manufacturer, but they did nothing about it. So it is very possibe that even who is user savvy can end up on porn web site just by typing in an address for a modem. Fortunately I had the know how to get away from the porn site, and not ever went back. I mean there were some very nasty pics on the site. Full nudity. It was disgusting, and I'm not a prude by any stretch of the imagination, but it even made me sick to see what was there....Kids often surf the web, and most parents aren't aware of what sites they end up on. I keep my computer in the living room, next to my sofa, and all I have to do is look over and I can see what site my son is on. Even though he's 18 if he's on a site that I do not approve of, I have him shut it down and go to a different site where there's no porn...They learn fast enough as it is.
The judge and the prosecutor should have recused themselves from this case because they were not computer literate, and found a judge and jury who were computer literate. Sounds like maliscioius prosectution to me.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 7:15 am
I suppose I have been really lucky then. I have never gone to a website that has led me to a porn subsite but I have heard the stories from my friends who have been hit with spam mail as a result of accidentally visiting a site linked to the smut. Perhaps a petition on this woman's behalf to the DA in Connecticut is in order here.
noted, thanks, Cate....
Saturday July 12, 2008, 9:28 am
The majority of the State's Attorneys (prosecutors) in Connecticut have a very vindictive mindset. Many of them are much more invested in "winning" than in seeing justice done. It's a sad situation but the truth. I see it every day on the job.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 9:37 am
The judge who overturned the conviction, Hilary Strackbein, ruled that the witness the state presented as a computer expert, a Norwich police detective, provided “erroneous” testimony about the classroom computer. “The jury may have relied, at least in part, on that false information,” said Strackbein.
The judge cited a forensic computer analysis conducted by the state police crime lab - conducted after the guilty verdict - to support the argument that the verdict should be set aside. She said the lab report “contradicts testimony of the state’s computer witness.”
Saturday July 12, 2008, 10:13 am
"Why did a school have a computer that could so easily access porn sites?"
Two reasons. Firewalls to prevent that cost money and so does hiring people who know how to set up safe, secure computer networks. A LOT of schools are inadequately protected. I volunteered setting up the library at one, and one day I found the kids DELIBERATELY looking at porn. The counselor just sent them to their classes. When I told them they needed firewalls and updated virus protection, they looked at me like I was nuts.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 10:15 am
Cate,
Maybe we should start a petition about this!!!!!!!!!!! I think it is horrible what has happened to Julie Send it to the court system , the school district and or every business in her town at least try to get someone to give this poor woman a job.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 12:21 pm
It is so horrible when someone gets caught up in the system, and can't ever seem to shake free. Bella has a good idea about the petition, would it help to send 5,000 signatures to the school board, congressman, senator, governor? Even prisoners are hired after they've done their time, and this poor woman hasn't even done a crime. Noted with frustration, Cate.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 12:34 pm
The middleschool incident took place in 2004. Julie was sentenced in Jan 2007. A few months later another judge vacated the ruling and issued her a new trial. It has not come to trial yet Please see: http://www.pbs.org/teachers/learning.now/2007/06/julie_amero_granted_new_trial_1.html and
http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200828/1473/Julie-Amero-still-stuck-in-limbo-waiting-for-new-trial
There is a defense fund: http://julieamer.blogspot.com/2007/02/contribute-to-julie.html
I cannot find the coverage and editorials from the Norwich Bulletin but blogs and articles suggest it was trying to increase circulation at the expense of Julie Amero & her justice. Please see:
http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/
http://region19.blogspot.com/2007/01/porn-royalties-at-norwich-bulletin.html
The Bulletin may be contacted at:
http://media.norwichbulletin.com/contacts/]
Norwich Main Number: 860-887-9211
The Norwich Bulletin
66 Franklin Street
Norwich, CT 06360
There is also an interesting confession from one of her purported students that day. Please see:
http://idiocracy.wordpress.com/2007/02/20/julie-amero-and-the-porn-pop-ups-the-secret-story/
It certainly appears that Mack Sennet would fit right in the Norfolk constabulary.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 12:38 pm
I'm lucky that I'm very computer literate, when I've caught the children in my class looking at sites they shouldn't be I've been able to block the sites and prevent virus infections without the school's support.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 12:51 pm
I have followed this case (Live in CT). The fault is NOT that of the teacher the FAULT lies with the School system in not updating the ADWARE. Many people think this is so hard. Most Schools have FIREWALLS, why didn't Norwich? Why didn't the SCHOOL SYSTEM take the responsibility to protect the children in their care for most of the day? How was a SUBSTITUTE teacher suppose to know there was NO system in place to PROTECT HER AND THE STUDENTS? Frankly, the population of Norwich should be outraged at the Board of Education for not protecting their students. It's always easy to "Blame the teacher" whether she/he be the regular or substitute. I've found that there is a lack of support for teachers in the classrooms and knows several very good teachers who have left the profession because of this.
Norwich School Systems could spend some money on a Firewall and cut the crap. It doesn't take a genius to put adware on a computer and keep it updated. Each teacher should have been able to do that for their own classroom computer to protect themselves. I'm a retired teacher and I never let the kids on my classroom computer, they are way to tricky.
Saturday July 12, 2008, 1:25 pm
OKAY, DAMMNIT, I HAVE DONE WHAT I SWORE NEVER TO DO AGAIN ON CARE2 - I HAVE STARTED A PETITION FOR JULIE. NOW ALL OF YOU GO SIGN IT AND TELL EVERYONE ON YOUR FRIENDS LISTS TOO! RESTORE MY FAITH IN ACTIVISM AT CARE!
Saturday July 12, 2008, 2:02 pm
My husband has just retired from a large school system of the Metro-Area of Detroit (suburban area outside Detroit city limits), and he is driving me crazy...help...heehee. Oh but anyways..., he was always very concerned, as on lunch hours the guys would use the computers to play on Pogo or such. However, porno site would pop up and keep popping up and ticklers would rewrite these adwares over and over. He couldn't believe one of the most well-funded school systems in the area, couldn't maintain the "control of content" that could be accessed on these computers.
