Substitute teacher convicted in school computer porn case - Boston.com
"Substitute teacher convicted in school computer porn case January 9, 2007 NORWICH, Conn. --A substitute teacher in the Norwich school system is facing up to 40 years in prison after being convicted of exposing students to pornography on a computer at the school.
Julie Amero, 40, of Windham, was convicted Friday on four counts of risk of injury to a minor in connection to pornography the students saw on her computer screen.
Prosecutors said sexually graphic computer images she accessed were seen by several of her Kelly Middle School students in October 2004.
During the trial, Amero said any inappropriate images on her computer screen were from adware, which can generate pop-up ads and not from sites specifically keyed.
Prosecutor David Smith contended Amero physically clicked onto the graphic Web sites, which included meetlovers.com and femalesexual.com.
Sentencing has been set for March 2 in Superior Court.
The Education Wonks has a nice discussion on this. Check it out.
My thoughts are:
The issue is an issue because some folks are dazed with their EYES WIDE OPEN GLIMMERING WITH $$$$$$$$$!
As one who has taught technology in the school system, I can tell you first hand, that there are MANY teachers who are computer-phobic. Some do not even know how to turn it on or off. There should be staff development for teachers who are not versed in educational computer technology, not finger pointing. Staff development given last year does not help a new teacher or a substitute this year.
These pron sites are very clever and just visiting whitehouse.com can get you in a mess. No one in that school had to do anything wrong for this to have happened. The system servers should have been active with constantly updated strong filters. That will help, but if someone brings in a data disk that is already infected, it can do it's damage before any one knows there is a problem.
This is in my opinion, parents looking for an easy class action buck, and/or administrators willing to sell out the teacher for their own protection and/or prosecutors looking to get their name in print. jurys are not always given the full information they need to make a fair decision, and some jurys are just not too sharp. Jury's like lotto tickets, you just can't count on divine intervention. It's the luck of the draw. Future teachers beware- sadly, it is not going to get any better.
Bottom line, I think this should be a learning experience for all involved, and move on
Those are my thoughts, what are yours?
Visit: The Educational Voyage Portal Search Engine
An Educatonal Voyage! Education Teachers Instruction
powered by performancing firefox