A local newspaper posted on Sunday the 346-page courtroom transcript of a trial that found Connecticut substitute teacher Julie Amero guilty of harming minors because her schoolroom PC was plagued by pornographic pop-up ads.
The transcript, placed online by the Norwich Bulletin, brings more detail to a case that has quickly become a controversial issue in the security community. Prosecutors argued that forensics evidence proved that Amero had herself caused the pop-up ads by going to pornographic Web sites, but security experts have lambasted the assertions and have organized a massive effort to analyze the disk image of Amero's classroom computer.
The transcripts show that the prosecution's main case against Amero was that she did not do enough to prevent her pupils from seeing the images on the screen, according to the Norwich Bulletin. However, the newspaper's reporting of the case has been criticized by security experts and others.
The case has attracted an enormous amount of interest, because the details of the trial appear to indicate that the jury convicted the teacher based on a significant lack of understanding of the technology involved and a flawed analysis of the digital evidence. For example, a police detective testified that Amero would have had to click on pornographic Web sites to cause the pop-up advertisements--testimony that security experts have roundly refuted.
Moreover, Amero did not do nothing. Evidence appears to indicate that the monitor of the classroom computer had been turned to face away from the students and that the children had to actually walk to the front of the classroom to see the images.
Amero is scheduled to be sentenced on Friday in Norwich Superior Court. The four felony counts could, conceivably, result in up to 40 years of jail time for the former schoolteacher.
Posted by: Robert Lemos