• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Pop-up ads get teacher 40 years in prison

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I can't imagine how I would have turned out if I'd been inadvertantly exposed to pornographic images at 13 years of age. The horror!!
 
It's not a tech debate, it's a scumbag prosecutor debate.
The prosecutor chose to go after this woman knowing that that would result in the possibility of her going to jail for 40 years because some children saw some naked pictures, for whatever reason.
Until we hold prosecutors responsible, it's not going to change.
 
Another example of how stupid prosecutors, judges and jurors don't know the first thing about computers or the Internet.

A 13-year old seeing pornographic images, even if it WERE intentional, is not worth 40 years in prison or even 5.
 
Originally posted by: BatmanNate
I can't imagine how I would have turned out if I'd been inadvertantly exposed to pornographic images at 13 years of age. The horror!!

i can tell you how i've turned out after intentionally showing myself pornographic images at 13 years of age, however 😀

or maybe i should sue the neighbor for leaving his playboy collection in his unlocked garage!


Originally posted by: illusion88
Why didnt she turn off the monitor or cover it up somehow?

as to the first, probably doesn't know that they're independent.
 
Originally posted by: illusion88
Why didnt she turn off the monitor or cover it up somehow?

Why didn't the school put filtering software to block those sites to begin with?
You can ask why or what all you want, she does not deserve to go to jail because some kids saw some naked pics. Period, end of story.
 
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: illusion88
Why didnt she turn off the monitor or cover it up somehow?

Why didn't the school put filtering software to block those sites to begin with?
You can ask why or what all you want, she does not deserve to go to jail because some kids saw some naked pics. Period, end of story.

Amazing the school is being prosecuted too

Principal Scott Fain said the computer lacked the latest firewall protection because a vendor?s bill had gone unpaid. ?I was shocked to see what made it through,? he said.

Her sentence would be stupid but I'm constantly amazed by the people here who think porn should be a class taught in middle school.
 
It's beyond ridiculous that it went any further than a reprimand to the sub for allowing the students to have access to the computer. She should not have left the classroom without another adult left to monitor the students. Subs get paid squat and put up with an enormous amount of crap.
 
Originally posted by: slsmnaz
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: illusion88
Why didnt she turn off the monitor or cover it up somehow?

Why didn't the school put filtering software to block those sites to begin with?
You can ask why or what all you want, she does not deserve to go to jail because some kids saw some naked pics. Period, end of story.

Amazing the school is being prosecuted too

Principal Scott Fain said the computer lacked the latest firewall protection because a vendor?s bill had gone unpaid. ?I was shocked to see what made it through,? he said.

Her sentence would be stupid but I'm constantly amazed by the people here who think porn should be a class taught in middle school.

If a parent leaves a computer on and the kid walks in and sees some porn popups, should they get 40 years too?
 
1) the prosecutor is a douche
2) the jury is full of douches
3) the appellate court will overturn
4) lawyers win $$$
 
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: JS80

3) the appellate court will overturn

what makes you think so?

This is probably a pretty good start:

?What is extraordinary is the prosecution admitted there was no search made for spyware ? an incredible blunder akin to not checking for fingerprints at a crime scene,? Alex Eckelberry, president of a Florida software company, wrote recently in the local newspaper. ?When a pop-up occurs on a computer, it will get shown as a visited Web site, and no ?physical click? is necessary.?
 
I heard about this a couple weeks ago on Kim Kamando's show. As I understand it it was 90F outside so the teacher didn't have a coat to throw over the monitor.

The anti-virus hadn't been updated in two years there was no pop-up blocker or anti-spyware.

 
Originally posted by: CPA
While I agree any jailtime would be overkill, please don't ask what damage is inflicted if you don't have young children.


:disgust: I wouldnt exactly consider 13 young, especially when it comes to looking at porno. Believing anything else is just naive.
 
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: JS80

3) the appellate court will overturn

what makes you think so?

This is probably a pretty good start:

?What is extraordinary is the prosecution admitted there was no search made for spyware ? an incredible blunder akin to not checking for fingerprints at a crime scene,? Alex Eckelberry, president of a Florida software company, wrote recently in the local newspaper. ?When a pop-up occurs on a computer, it will get shown as a visited Web site, and no ?physical click? is necessary.?

The court system may be ridiculous at the lower level, especially because of stupid prosecutors and dumb juries, but the intelligence factor does go up and any reasonable panel of judges would overturn this.
 
Are the jurors retarded? They had all the facts laid out in front of them and the best argument that the quoted juror could come up with was why didn't she unplug the computer or cover it up.
 
It is not the substitute teachers jobs to police the computer, it is the schools IT department/person to police the school. If a kid tapes pictures of nude people to the blackboard is it the teachers fault or the students? Sue the kids who went to the hairstyle website. Old people who don't understand computers but feel they have the knowledge to police them should be shot.
 
thats total f*ckin bullsh*t!!! :| if i was that poor woman husband i would do what ever i could to sue the school for having lax security measures. i cant even believe a jury would find her guilty for this. i wish so bad i could serve on a jury for a case like this.

Edit: the defense for this lady were scum and morons, there is no way they should have lost this case. there are so many holes in the prosecuters charges and claims that a 1year law student could have smoked the DA.
 
Poor woman. I know a substitute teacher personally. She's always in financial trouble. You already know teachers get paid squat for what they have to deal with. Subs are even worst off. This must be her worst nightmare come to fruition. Wrong place at the wrong time.

There's absolutely no way this woman deserve any jail time at all, much less 40 years. Drug runners, rapists, theives, and murderers get away with lighter sentences.
 
this happened to us in 9th grade... teacher was trying to pull up some map and misspelled something, needless to say we all got a treat on a 5-6' projector...
 
This is a symptom of this country's obsession with "nakedness". Oh, the horror, the kids saw naked people! They are damaged for life! Sheeeesh.

That, and the prosecutor should be summarily executed for pushing the issue to try and get a woman significant jail time for something so insignificant.
 
i wonder what the parents are saying? i know if my kid was in that class i would be protesting the conviction. crap like this is exactly like the salem witch trials but people getting long stints in prison not hanged.
 
Back
Top