What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
105 Comments
- Prowlermdx, on 10/11/2007, -4/+299I hope she sues the DA, detectives et al for a gazillion dollars. This is the kind of incompetence that should not be tolerated by goverment officials!
- mowyouover, on 10/11/2007, -4/+93Even if it was intentional, come on, 40 year? WTF?
- Tmacman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+79Justice belatedly served. Good for her.
- Rooster99, on 10/11/2007, -0/+78About ***** time too! This has gone on too long! I hope that those who pushed for the 40 year sentence get what they deserve - A kick in the teeth!
- jstohler, on 10/11/2007, -1/+63The DA's reign of terror is over. For now.
- drakethegreat, on 10/11/2007, -1/+48This is good. Now if they were serious about stopping this kind of crap from happening again they should put the prosecuting lawyer on trial for attempt to conceal the evidence. He/she should sit in jail for a couple months and think about why we have a legal system that requires LEGITIMATE EVIDENCE.
- Iconwolf, on 10/11/2007, -0/+44"I think she could only sue on grounds of malicious prosecution. As bad as the prosecution was I don't think it could be proven that what they did was malicious."
Actually I've read quite a bit about this story and I personally find a great deal of malicious prosecution occurred. Not to mention a LOT of outright incompetence. The worst was:
[quote]Hartz is asked if Amero's scenario - a computer slipping into "an endless loop" of uncontrollable pornographic websites popping up - is possible.
"I've never seen that," he says, "so I would have to say probably not."[/endquote]
http://www.courant.com/news/local/columnists/hc-julieamero.artmar25-col,0,1404311.column?page=4&coll=hc-utility-local
According to page three of that article Hartz is head of the IT department for the district. How'd this dude make head IT of anything? He certainly didn't spend much time online if you ask me. Popup storms might not be seen much today, and might have been relatively infrequent even back in 2004, but they were quite common occurance up until what, 2002? 2003?
The worst part is the whole ordeal resulted in her having a miscarriage (and from what I understand she has/had problems conceiving in the first place). Even if she sues and wins, the money isn't not going to replace her kid. - twertyto, on 10/11/2007, -4/+48I think she could only sue on grounds of malicious prosecution. As bad as the prosecution was I don't think it could be proven that what they did was malicious.
- MakiNavaja, on 10/11/2007, -2/+46Lawyers are most certainly now beating a path to her door.
- fani, on 10/11/2007, -1/+35I hope she doesn't keep getting called " Porn Popup teacher" anymore.. That'll be true victory for her..
- smitting, on 10/11/2007, -0/+32Maybe if the DA sat in jail and the tax payers got stuck with the bill from the lawsuit, they'll vote these crooks out of office. This is definitely grounds for a lawsuit.
- Myonosken, on 10/11/2007, -4/+28Actually no, the article is newer than that. Seems its been overturned.
- endustry, on 10/11/2007, -2/+24This guy should go into private practice with Mike Nifong -- ***** & ***** LLC, attorneys at law.
- khyberkitsune, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21Sadly the limit for a redress of grievances from the U.S. Gov't is $500,000 per charge.
OTOH, she can sue the ***** out of each person individually. That'll rack up some good amounts of cash. - Wootery, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21Just because they get things right occasionally doesn't mean it's improving.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20Justice has been served to Paris Hilton, and justice has FINALLY prevailed on Julie Amero, that took way too long, poor woman... I may start having just a little bit of faith in the justice system... Now if we could only retry OJ.
- compgeek, on 10/11/2007, -0/+19I hope she sues the pants off them I'm not a litigous person by nature but this is gross misconduct on the DA's part plain and simple. if they never examined the computer in question until after the conviction then how do they make an accurate statement that the porn was or was not from pop ups
stupid idiots
Dugg in support of the DA gettin his in hell and the teacher getting her day to sue his ass off - monkeyrun, on 10/11/2007, -2/+19what a waste of time .....
The computer is ad-ware infected, big deal. - GMorgan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17Adding 'Corruption' after Political is just a waste of a word. Corruption is implied when you say Political.
- RADEONhead, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16This is why school districts have such trouble with money. They have one obvious mistake parents get all crazy and want to school district to press charges. The School district press charges and after all the trouble they find out it couldn't have been prevented. But now after all this she counter sues, the district looses millions and another teacher. Good Game America.
- mpn401, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15The ignorance of technology from most authority astounds me.
- Charlotte_Web, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14Justice finally prevails.
Unfortunately, she probably has a legal bill the size of a home mortgage by this point.
Oh, and aren't DA's generally immune from prosecution? That's what's been happing with the DA in the Duke Lacrosse players case. - robwicks, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15I hope far more than a lawsuit occurs. I think prosecutors and others involved should really start going to jail over this sort of thing.
- sonaro, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15That's why I said it was misleading. This story failed to mention that she was already granted a new trial. They also write about the activities that occurred on Wednesday, so it is not new, just late.
"On June 6, 2007, Amero was granted a new trial and entered a plea of not guilty. The new trial date has not yet been set."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Amero - matriculated, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1340 years for popups? The retarded justice system can't even put away pedos and rapists for 1/10 of that time!
- Iconwolf, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12Largely because of the internet itself. Had this story not met the eyes of Walter Hooper(and others) and been passed on to Alex Ecklesberry and such, Amero would be sitting in prison right now.
- namae, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12I really hope she counter sues and wins, this was absolutely ridiculous.
- Grouser, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11The DA was David J. Smith. But let's attribute the blame:
1. The lawyer she originally used was totally incompetent. And the DA took full advantage.
2. The police officer (Lounsbury) who examined the computer is completely unapologetic, to this day. Here's an article about him:
"Lieutenant James Daigle Junior, detectives **Mark Lounsbury** and Albert Costa and Officer First Class Scott Smith were accused of taking nude or topless photographs of three women who participated in underage drinking stings last November. Chief Louis Fusaro Senior fired Daigle and suspended the others on Tuesday."
http://ww2.myupn9.com/Global/story.asp?S=818224
The judge, Hillary B. Strackbein, fell asleep during the trial.
Amero's school principal called in the police and accused her of a crime, without telling the investigating officer that she had reported the problem with popups, and that she had sought help from other teachers. *Intent* is essential to the crime she was accused of, so this exculpatory behavior was hidden from investigators. Then the school board sent out letters to 750 parents naming Amero and saying she wasn't permitted to teach any more. The school IT director (Hartz) did not evaluate whether any malware was on the computer, nor did he tell the investigating officer that the content filter license had lapsed.
The teachers' association (Connecticut Education Association) refused to get involved because substitute teachers are not unionized.
The local newspaper (Norwich Bulletin) went on a witch hunt. Example "Intent was apparent... her deeds were disgusting and merit punishment" http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070111/OPINION01/701110326
On the other hand, her present lawyer, William Dow, is doing a great job. I think he's working pro bono. Here's a picture of Amero and Dow:
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hrt-hc2julieamero20070606090440,0,6481121.photo - MrEguy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Absolutely right. I was completely bowled over when I first read the details of this case.
She needs to sue the school district for money damages. Sue the county for malicious prosecution -- and most importantly, go after that pompous, ignorant litigious ***** of a district attorney to teach him a lesson in justice he'll never forget. - Conwaysb0718, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8geeks everywhere /rejoice
- virtualinvasion, on 10/11/2007, -0/+87th graders? Why is this such a big deal? Most of them probably visit porn sites on a regular basis anyway...
- 0004, on 07/04/2008, -0/+7@iconwolf
FYI win98 has NO FIREWALL whatsoever, and security holes in the network connectivity protocols that you could easily fit a hippo through them - stevenvh, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Great news. I admit I was worried about the outcome with all those hyenas...
Kudos to all who helped her. - gabrielg01, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7This is great news, but you should also cool down a bit. A few days ago that preacher wife was sentenced for murdering her husband, and she got 210 days in jail. Not even a year of jail for a murder. She was let go because she is a "Christian"...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/08/national/main2903673.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_2903673
By comparison this poor teacher was facing up to 40 years of jail for computer pop-ups...that tells you something about the ***** up system we have. - Snarfy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7"I've never seen that," he says, "so I would have to say probably not."
ATHF had this covered...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHsUZlJ7lug - Killeroid, on 10/11/2007, -10/+16Retard, did you even read the f*cking article. It wasn' t her pc you moron, it was a school pc.
- Syntaxis, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Wait. If not for "geeks", she'd get 40 years because a few teenagers got to see the activities responsible for the birth of every single one of the hundreds of billions of people that have ever lived?
Yeah that makes sense... ( - my10cent, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5AH what a wonderful week for justice, THIS and Paris is back in jail, I love it.
The Internet is ***** up, that teacher had NO power over that pop-up and should never have been punished in the first place, PLUS 7thgraders already have a porn collection, heck I had one when I was in 5th grade *lol* this world need to get over themselves. - TheShad0w, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I believe that internal affairs should be called upon to investigate the DA for gross incompetence and actions unbecoming of a government official. The simple fact is that he didn't do his job. He was trying to win a case to further his career and not uphold justice. Second the campus IT director should be fired, end of questions. There is no excuse for the level of ignorance this guy has. Lastly her original Lawyer should be brought before the bar. He didn't move in his clients best interest. If he had he would have hired REAL IT professionals and this would have be resolved MONTHS ago.
To top it all off she should sue each and every one of these morons for slander and emotional/mental anguish - blanktarget, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I remember when this story first popped up on digg and the outcry from so many people that she was getting railroaded. I can't believe it even took this long to over turn it, not to mention her going to jail in the first place. I hope she can sue and get a huge settlement out of this.
- Novion76, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4about damn time.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Kid these days are doing worse things then this. even if they get exposed to porn it makes little difference. if they wont to "Think about the Children" then they should try to get some better ethics in them rather then letting them emulate ***** and whoretards like Justin, Paris, Lindsay etc.
- Amnesia10, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I think that she may have an excellent case for malicious prosecution. The fact that the police did not find the spy ware and unable to prove that it was on the machine before she used that machine could be considered malicious at worst or gross incompetence at the least. Also the fact that the school did not take necessary precautions re firewalls and anti spy ware, net filters and Anti virus protection could mean that the school could be held culpable. That could mean that the school's head of IT could be responsible.
She could sue for consequential damages the costs of her legal defense, damages for personal trauma and for the loss of her baby. She could sue the school first for failing to protect her as a teacher and the children as students. The school has a legal duty to protect its employees and students. They clearly failed. The students in turn could launch a class action suit against the school as well for failing to take the necessary precautions. With the police going on a wild goose chase the school would not have protected the computers and the students. This would mean that all the students who passed through that school in that period could possibly sue the school.
In the end the school and the police screwed up big time. - TheBobBlog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I'm sure more then half of the class had already been exposed to porn on their home computers anyway.
- Neiby, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Damn, this makes me feel good. This news just made my day! Maybe there is some hope for us after all.
- stillsight, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7That was a very poorly written "editorial".... IMO it feels as if it were written by a high school freshman journalism student... the ending "and it should never happen again..." is the only opinionated sentence in the thing...
Bah. - medtecherino, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3who was the DA?
remember this travesty on his/her election day
you know, the most egregious thing is she will never even get a simple honest apology - gtak55, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5man..i would of had straight A's and perfect attendance if they showed porn in class
i need to go back to high schoool IMMEDIATELY.. - grumpyrain, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3> "I've never seen that," he says, "so I would have to say probably not."[/endquote]
> http://www.courant.com/news/local/columnists/hc-julieamero.artmar25-col,0,1404311.column?page=4&coll=hc-utility-local
> According to page three of that article Hartz is head of the IT department for the district.
What a shambles. I admit to not following the case, but it is ridiculous to rely on testimony of a person who would be potentially otherwise culpable for failing to have appropriate filters, spyware and virus protection installed on PCs in his district if she is found innocent. Whilst I can also say "I've never seen that", I have seen old spyware riddled machines trying to popup bazillion web pages, so I imagine it certainly is possible. An IT department head is primarily a paper pusher, not a security expert, and if the prosecution were serious about this charge, they should have located an expert witness in the web security and malware field.
Of course, teachers all have a responsibility to protect our children, so the onus on her is to do whatever she is technically capable of to prevent children in her care from exposure, or if there has already been exposure, to minimise it. That may be non-technical methods like removing the children from the classroom, taping a piece of cardboard, throwing a cloth over the monitor, etc until an IT person can get there.
If she made reasonable effort in a timely manner and within her skills and capabilities to protect those in her care, then sought advice from those whose job it is to maintain the computers, I would have considered it the end of her responsibility. It is ridiculous that her name should be muddied just so they can score cheap political 'we take a strong stance for protecting children' points. It is also their job to protect the innocent. The investigation should have then moved to the IT department, why she was not advised on how to disconnect the monitor, or even to simply pull turn the computer off at the power plug (the worst that can happen there is a dead hard drive). - MrDavis, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I can't believe the people prosecuting could be so ignorant, i guess they only see what they want to see and facts don't matter if you are just trying to get one more mark in the W column.
i hate to see what happens to people who don't make the front page. -
Show 51 - 100 of 105 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is