Slashdot Mirror


Teacher Julie Amero Gets a New Trial

LazloHollyfeld writes "A New London Superior court judge this morning granted a defense request seeking a new trial for Julie Amero, the former Norwich middle school substitute teacher convicted of exposing her middle school students to Internet porn. Acting on a motion by Amero's attorney, William Dow III, Judge Hillary Strackbein placed the case back on a trial list. Amero had faced 40 years on the conviction of four counts of risk of injury to a minor. State prosecutor David Smith confirmed that further forensic examination at the state crime lab of Amero's classroom computer revealed "some erroneous information was presented during the trial. Amero and her defense team claimed she was the victim of pop-up ads — something that was out of her control. Judge Strackbein said because of the possibility of inaccurate facts, Amero was "entitled to a new trial in the interest of justice." After the brief court appearance, a smiling Amero stood next to her attorney. "I feel very comfortable with the decision," Amero said. Dow commended the state for investigating the case further. A new court date has yet to be scheduled. Amero has reentered a not guilty plea."

5 of 341 comments (clear)

  1. Re:40 years?!? by BoRegardless · · Score: 4, Informative

    Teachers don't get 4 years for doing it with students.

  2. Re:Legal Defence by Saanvik · · Score: 4, Informative

    Um, no, there is no evidence of shady behavior. There's evidence that the computer in question displayed adult images during the time in question, but there are many reasons, such as the pop-up ads blamed by the defense, that such images could have been displayed.

  3. Happened to us - sort of... by evil_aar0n · · Score: 5, Informative

    When I served on our local school board, one of our teachers had pop-ups take over his screen when a student used the PC while the teacher was logged in. He quickly responded to the situation to minimize the exposure, but some students still saw things they shouldn't, according to the district, and it was reported up the chain. When I heard about it, I was more unhappy with the IT folks who can manage to block all sorts of sites, and lock down this, and make impenetrable that, according to their boasts, but couldn't block a pop-up. I argued that if anyone should be punished, it should be the head IT guy, but, as only one voice among seven on the board, I was overruled and the principal wrote up the teacher for some infraction or another - I don't recall exactly what they settled on. I don't believe it was turned over to the police or DA, though.

    Good luck with the re-trial, but if their district is anything like ours, a "not guilty" verdict still won't help her get her job back. Not that she'd want to work for them, anyway...

    --
    Truth, Justice. Or the American Way.
  4. Re:She should lose her teaching license by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't mean to offend you, but I frankly doubt that you actually read the transcripts that you link to.

    You claim that this happened in an elementary school, but it was in a middle school. By that you imply that the the kids were much younger than they really were. At the time of the hearings, all the students that testified were fifteen, and they said that they were thirteen years old when the incident took place. (One student said (s)he wasn't sure if (s)he was twelve).

    You also claim that the kids were exposed to the porn for several hours, but in the transcripts the kids explicitly say that the students could not see the porn from their seats, as the monitor was on the teacher's desk and facing away from them. They say they caught glimpses of the "popups" when they went to the front of the room (to ask about the assignment they were working on, to throw some trash away, etc.). The real scandal began when those students talked about what they saw with other students outside of the classroom, but based on the testimonies most of those students never really saw the images.

    So, people who read your comment will get their emotions manipulated, as they will think that these were dozens of pre-teens who were exposed to hard core porn being continuously presented to them for several hours in a large monitor that was facing them (a setup very common in elementary schools, where a handful of computers are placed against the walls, facing towards the center of the room). And that my friend, is a very different picture from what the testimonies say.

  5. Re:Legal Defence by ryanov · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since it appears as if you've never had teenagers, you probably don't know what the hell you're talking about.

    My parents smacked me once in awhile -- probably not their proudest moment -- but it sure kept me from doing shit. I resented them at the time, but not for that -- for not being allowed to do whatever it is I wanted to do (which was probably some asshole thing I shouldn't have been doing anyway).

    Maybe you can do it without corporal punishment, and that's fine... but I know that every time I ride the train and some little shit is running up and down the aisles, it occurs to me that kids don't seem to have to behave the way they used to. SOMETHING is obviously different.