The Connecticut substitute teacher was tried and convicted after her computer, probably owing to a malware bug, displayed smutty websites in students’ presence (Jan. 20, Feb. 15, Mar. 14). The original trial, notes Glenn Reynolds (Jun. 7), “seemed like a grotesque miscarriage of justice”; prosecutors did not oppose a defense motion for a new trial. (Nate Anderson, “Substitute teacher spared sentencing for porn pop-ups, gets new trial”, Ars Technica, Jun. 7).
Related posts
In child protection; Connecticut; crime and punishment; technology
[...] Prosecutors in Norwich, Ct. still haven’t dropped their case against teacher Julie Amero in malware-popup smut case. Why not? [TalkLeft, earlier] [...]