This software wrongly caused the jury to believe that the teacher clicked on the links. Read from an actual juror who believes this:

http://blogs.pcworld.com/tipsandtweaks/archives/003741.html

This same juror believes that the teacher should have turned off the computer. I know from first hand experience (I am in IT) that not everyone knows how to do this. I was on the phone with a client a few days ago, a middle-aged loan processor at a mortgage office, and her PC was all locked up, so I tried to explain to her how to press in the power button to force a shutdown or to power off the computer. After 10 minutes of back and forth I gave up. She could not find the button. Next I told her to pull out the power plug. Amazingly she didn't know which of the cords was the power cord and she didn't want to try because she was afraid of messing things up. I had to drive over to the office and do it myself. So for this juror to declare that beyond a reasonable doubt that the teacher should have known how to turn off the PC is ridiculous.

I detect a certain amount of self-righteousness and "I am perfect and would never have done what she did" in him. I wonder if that same sort of attitude is common on juries. If so, then a lot of folks have been wrongly convicted.

So sue the software manufacturer, because this software is wrongly convicting people. And sue the school for not having the mandated filters, etc. that they should have had. And finally, sue the local newspaper that has trashed her good name repeatedly in old-town closed-mind like fashion.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/434/34349#34349