halsdfhas

Teacher tube test

test

Famundo

Free Online Calendar - Families, Schools, Church and more

New Group calendaring site, from the Women of the Web 2.0  podcast.

 

Norwich Bulletin Opinion 3/18/07 - Porn was Amero's burden - Failure to protect children is the crime

Norwich Bulletin - www.norwichbulletin.com - Norwich, Conn.

Our view: Porn was Amero's burden

Failure to protect children is the crime

Julie Amero is scheduled to be sentenced March 29 in Norwich Superior Court. It is a sentencing and a case that has received international attention.

Amero could receive up to 40 years, if she gets the maximum sentence allowable for each of her four convictions of risk of injury to a minor, and the judge orders them to be served consecutively. It's an unlikely sentence, even though children were exposed to six hours of Internet pornography under Amero's watch. We think Amero is likely to receive some sort of community service, and it would be a fair sentence.

ADVERTISEMENT

Amero has many supporters, which should not sway the court, as most of them have formed opinions based on limited knowledge of the facts of the case, or simple hearsay. At the heart of this international debate is whether Amero was responsible for causing the pornography to be on the computer screen for an entire school day, when seventh-grade students were able to view it. Many in the technology field have suggested she was the victim of a "porn storm," which were frequent problems in 2004, when the incident occurred. Some suggested the computer was overtaken by malware or spyware, technical parasites that will plant unwanted images, pop-ups, etc., onto a computer. Some have suggested Amero was the victim of a conspiracy by students.

Read the transcripts of the case and many of these arguments become moot. Read Amero's own words. Yes, there were victims: the children in the classroom who saw the graphic images. Six of them testified to the events of Oct. 19, 2004. Whether Amero was purposefully exploring pornographic Web sites, or was the victim of a technological assault, is irrelevant. She was the adult entrusted with the safety of those children, and she failed.

However, Amero is not the only one to blame. Pornographic sites should never have been able to appear on that school computer. The fact the school's protection against these sites was outdated falls firmly in the lap of the school district. Whoever did not do their job to ensure the proper fees were paid and the licensing was up-to-date deserves to be fired. Based on information the district has shared with the community, we believe the district has done its due diligence to ensure this kind of problem never occurs again.

The school district did have protection for the computers and should expect its teachers to have a smidgen of sensibility if an issue arose. That didn't happen Oct. 19, 2004.

Testimony tells the story

Let's look at the facts.

Amero testified the pornography was popping up all day. She said she tried to stop it but could not. She admitted leaving the classroom door open during her break. She said it never occurred to her to turn off the monitor, or unplug the computer. She did tell others she was having a problem with pop-ups, but she never explained they were pornographic -- a significant detail. She admitted it was possible students had seen the pop-ups. She even discussed the problem with students. Amero never went to the main office and did not discuss the issue with the principal until the next day, when she was questioned.

Somehow, after Amero left the school for the day, the pop-ups stopped. There is no record of them appearing before or after Amero was on that computer, or of there being pop-ups on any other computer at the school.

Different scenario

Let's assume for a moment that Amero was, in fact, the victim of a technical problem. What if the issue wasn't a technical problem? What if the problem was a racy magazine? Would she leave it open all day on her desk and push students away if they came to take a look, or would she close the magazine and put it away?

What if the problem was a fire in a trash can she did not start? Would Amero have done nothing, just as she did with the pop-ups? Would the excuse have been that she was not allowed to touch anything? What if the problem had been a fight in the class between students? Would Amero have run to the lounge and said, "I have misbehaving students," and not explained fully what the problem was?

Julie Amero does not deserve to teach in a classroom. She is incapable of ensuring the safety of children. We base this on Amero's testimony. She is an educated woman with more than minimal substitute teaching experience, yet she was unable -- or, worse, refused -- to solve the pop-up issue. Couldn't she, for example, have taped some paper over the screen? There were many avenues Amero could have explored, but did not, to rectify the problem.

Amero's conviction ensures she will not teach children again. That, not prison time, is the critical issue. If she never serves a day in prison, justice will have been served.

Post a Comment   View All Comments

---

	The State of Connecticut, the city of Norwich and the Norwich School System have rightly become laughingstocks in the eyes of the world. The Norwich Bulletin has disgraced itself every step of the way -- from Greg Smith's reporting, to Dan Axelrod's now whitewashed blog, to the editorial positions that you have taken. You have now capped it off. You will deserve every bit of the abuse you now receive. Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2007 7:15 am
	Thank you to your editors for finally making sense about this case. As someone who has worked in education for years, including as a substitute teacher, this case is a joke. The evidence that has been released shows what you said - that there was no porn before or after she left the class. This implies that it was visited while she was in room. If the sites were all popups, wouldn't they popup before and after she was there too? She is also guilty of doing nothing - and as someone who was an "experienced educator" she should have done something. A larger issue though, is why she was even on the computer in the first place. As a substitute, I never even turn on the classroom computer. There are private records and other important, confidential data stored on classroom computers - and a substitute has no business using the computer. Besides, as any teacher will attest, you don't have time to sit on the computer all day when you are supervising students correctly. She is guilty of being a poor substitute and not doing enough to protect her students. I'm glad to see that people are starting to stop making her look like the victim in this case. Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2007 6:29 am

From Peter Reilly's- Ed tech Journeys

Ed Tech Journeys

Education’s Hidden Messages March 16th, 2007 by preillyHidden messages are being delivered by our educational system to our students each and every day.



Peter asks and discusses what are these hidden messages?



Everytime I read Peter Reilly, my jaw drops and my brain hurts. Thank you, Pete.

For Fran - an aspiring Math teacher

Via Cool Cat Teacher

7math » home: "Welcome to the Seventh Grade Math Page!
Thanks for stopping by. Please feel free to share any ideas or resources you use for teaching any of the topics listed below.

Alabama Course of Study - 7th Grade Math
1 - Integers
2 – Order of Operations
3 – Rational Numbers
4 – Patterns as Algebraic Equation
5 – Translate Algebraic Expressions
6 – Equations
7 – Transformations
8 – Geometric Relationships, 2D-3D
9 – Circles
10 – Perimeter and Area
11 – Proportional Reasoning
12 – Measures of Central Tendency
13 – Probability of Compound Events

The Alabama State Department of Education published a Curriculum Guide to be used with special education students. It contains useful information concerning prerequisite skills for each objective."

Latest Article in Local Paper on Sub Teacher Porn Case

Latest Article in Local Paper on Sub Teacher Porn Case

http://norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070309/NEWS01/703090344

Experts rebuke Amero ruling
By GREG SMITH
Norwich Bulletin

The president of a Florida computer protection software company, skeptical of the conviction of a Norwich substitute teacher in a computer porn case, says computer experts are joining to aid in her defense.

Alex Eckelberry, owner of Sunbelt Software, said he and a "forensic team of A-list players across the country" are performing a forensic technical review of the computer hard drive used in the January conviction of Julie Amero.

Amero was convicted by a jury of exposing seventh-graders at Kelly Middle School to pornographic images on her classroom computer. The case has spawned a firestorm of debate and sympathy for many who see Amero as a victim of adware, or pop-up Internet advertisements. Evidence proving the claims, however, has not been presented in a court of law.

Eckelberry, who is among many to lambaste the conviction, said he is still analyzing evidence, but remains skeptical of the prosecution. He declined to mention names of other people involved.

"In this case, what we see is a preponderance of evidence showing pop-ups were occurring," he said.

Convicted on four counts of risk of injury to a minor, Amero faces the possibility of up to 40 years in jail when she is sentenced March 29 in Norwich Superior Court.

She is soliciting funds for her appeal on a blog site and her defense attorney had the sentencing postponed while other attorneys join the case.

Recently, a group of Connecticut professors signed their names to an advertisement asking State's Attorney Kevin Kane to perform an independent investigation. Kane declined comment on the matter.

Two University of Connecticut computer professors, whose names appear in the ad, said they read about Amero and think it's plausible she inadvertently accessed pornography, though they have not examined evidence in the case.

"I think the whole thing was blown out of proportion," said UConn computer professor Dong-Guk Shin. "Whether it was inadvertent or intentional, I think one of the bigger issues is the penalty going to fit the crime? Was there intent to harm a child? Was it criminal or carelessness? I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt."

Thomas Peters, a professor of computer science and engineering at UConn, said, "There's a lot of plausibility that this could have happened inadvertently. I don't question the judicial process. I think it doesn't seem there was a complete investigation in the case."

He said it only seems reasonable to do a full forensic investigation.

"It may exonerate her or it may convict her," Peterson said.

Both men said they became aware of the case through e-mails circulated at the school.

Norwich police Det. Mark Lounsbury, who performed the investigation in the case, presented evidence pornographic sites were accessed continuously for nearly two hours on the morning of Oct. 19, 2004. Ten male students admitted seeing images of nude men and women.

Lounsbury, who has come under fire by columnists and bloggers, stands by the evidence.

"What we're talking about is Web pages, clearly distinguishable between unwanted ads," Lounsbury said. "Clearly pages were accessed."

Lounsbury said he has no doubt adware was downloaded on the computer as certain sites were accessed, but he said people are drawing conclusions without the evidence at hand.

"I've seen a lot of talk, with nothing to substantiate that," Lounsbury said. "This isn't a guessing game. If you're going to blame a particular piece of software for doing something, you should be able to find that software."

Some people blame a lack of filtering protection on the school computers.

Robert Hartz, information services director for the Norwich School system, testified the content filtering, or firewall, remained in place, but had not been updated correctly during the previous months because the license had not been activated. The filtering system didn't regularly add newly discovered pornographic sites to its restricted Web sites database on the school's 2,000 computers.

"If the school had adequate protection, this would never had happened, certainly not to the degree that it did," Eckelberry contended. "The jury's out whether it would have blocked all these things, but this would have made a significant difference. The machine was basically unprotected."

Hartz contends, however, Norwich's filtering software failed to stop school computer users from accessing inappropriate Web sites just six times since 1998.

Under rules of the Federal Communication Commission's Children's Internet Protection Act, schools receiving federal funds must have an Internet safety program which includes measures "to filter Internet access" to obscene material.

Amero, despite having been reprimanded in the past for computer use at the school, claimed to be computer illiterate and hesitant to shut off the machine.

"It's blindly clear to me a half-day seminar of computer security and we would not be having this problem," Eckelberry said.

Reach Greg Smith at 425-4219 or gasmith@norwichbulletin.com

MySpace.com in CT

Several of the local TV news stations gave the story below a bit more detail including the fact that if you were under 18 along w/ the age verification the parent would have to be given access to their child's site. I have not seen any details on how this would be done but in his news conference, Blumenthal declared that "there is no excuse, the technology exists".

More to come as the legislature has hearings scheduled on the proposed law today.

A series six of well publicized MySpace sexual predator cases in CT has kept the issue and MySpace in the general public eye and in the educational world over the past year or so. One case had a 31 year old posing as a teenager using MySpace to arrange meetings. He raped at least 7 underage users (the youngest known was 14). Blumenthal who has a good rep as an AG with a activist bent for using his office in consumer protection, child welfare, etc. He is not afraid to use his office and get involved on the legal side of issues in the public eye.

In some ways he may be right in his anger at MySpace in particular. I checked in at MySpace after they announced they had put increased safety measures in place after an earlier case about 2 years ago. I was not so impressed. I thought that another service - Xanga had developed more visible and more intuitive controls for their entries especially their "footprints" feature that lets you see info about who is looking at your site, the ability to require a person to be signed in to Xanga as a user to view your site, and the ability for the user to rate their content as adult, where only people who choose to verify their age (via a credit card check, I think) can read it. I have seen some 3rd party stuff that works w/ MySpace to see who is looking at your site, but I saw nothing really clear on their site last time I looked.

From courant.com
--------------------
Blumenthal, Lawmakers Want Age Verification Rules For Myspace.com
--------------------

By SUSAN HAIGH
Associated Press Writer

March 7, 2007, 12:33 PM EST

HARTFORD -- Connecticut officials unveiled legislation Wednesday that would require MySpace.com and other social networking web sites to verify users' ages and obtain parental consent before minors post profiles online.

The bill comes a day after a man was sentenced to 14 years in prison for using MySpace.com to set up a sexual encounter with an 11-year-old Connecticut girl. It was one of the first federal sex cases involving the popular networking site.

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who met with other attorneys general on Tuesday, said 10 to 20 other states are considering similar legislation.

"The technology is available. The solution is financially feasible, practically doable," he said. "If we can put a man on the moon, we can check ages of people on these web sites."

Under the proposal, any networking site that fails to verify ages and obtain parental permission from parents to post profiles of users under 18 would face civil fines up to $5,000 per violation. Sites would have to check information about parents to make sure it is legitimate. Parents would be contacted directly when necessary.

A call seeking comment was left with a MySpace.com spokeswoman.

The bill, which is scheduled for a public hearing on Thursday, would apply to any organized online networking organization, including chat rooms.

MySpace.com, which has become a lightning rod for warnings about online sexual predators, purports to be the largest social networking Web site, with more than 100 million registered users. The site lets users post photos, blogs and journals. There have been scattered accounts of sexual predators targeting minors they met through the site.

Teacher Porn Case - Open Letter in Hartford Courant

An 1/8 Page Appearing on Page A4 in the Hartford Courant, March 6, 2007

An Open Letter To Chief States Attorney Kevin T. Kane

The Julie Amero case created outrage in internet forums and among computer experts all over the country. Briefly, Julie Amero was seven months pregnant and acting as a substitute seventh grade teacher in Norwich, Connecticut. She left the classroom briefly, and while she was gone some of her students used the class computer to surf the web. When she returned a stream of pornographic pop-up ads began to appear. She panicked and tried to stop the pop-ups but did not turn off the computer because she had firmly instructed not to do so. She was charged with exposing her students to pornography and was convicted in January. She now faces up to forty (40) years in prison.

Many computer experts believe that the stream of obscene pop-up ads were caused by malicious spyware and adware programs which users seldom know have infected their computers until too late –after they have done their evil work. It is most troubling that the computer had no firewall protection – apparently because a vendor’s bill went unpaid – and that the prosecution did not make a search for spyware.

An excellent suggestion has been offered by Mark Rasch, former chief of the US Department of Justice’s cyber crime unit: “Find and independent investigator with no preconceived notions at all and find out what happened.” We the undersigned computer science professors at Yale, UCONN, Wesleyan, Trinity, the University of Hartford, and the [Connecticut] State Universities urge you to take up Mark Rasch’s suggestion and to delay sentencing Julie Amero until the investigator has filed his report.

Signed by 29 Computer Science professors from the above institutions in an ad paid for by the signatories.

I looked quick at the Courant Web space (ctnow.com) but as this was an ad it did not make it there so I can give no electronic link. - Steve

For Music Lovers - this is great

I just became aware of this site which is like an Internet radio station. You put in a song or artist  you like and it finds other music similar. I just played with it today but I think you can end up combining artists into play mixes. As I have pretty obscure musical tastes this has been a treat today.



http://www.pandora.com/