The Julie Group

  Nellie2 23:37 12 Jun 2007

Not sure if you are aware of what happened to Julie Amero, she is a substitute teacher and was convicted of exposing her students to porn pop ups. There was a lot of expert evidence that wasn't permitted to be heard at the original trial... anyway, the powers that be have decided that she should have a new trial and all the evidence should be heard. With any luck, it might not even come to that and the charges might be dropped.

The point of this post is to tell you that the security and computer forensic experts who got together to help Julie have formed something called The Julie Group.

If you have time.. please take a look at my link, it is well worth a read. Thanks. click here

  The Brigadier 14:01 13 Jun 2007

So this is a convicted criminal who has been found guilty & who is after justice?
Lucky they dont hang perverts then!

  beynac 14:21 13 Jun 2007

Have you read about this case? If not, then I suggest that you get the facts before making that sort of comment. Julie Amero is not a "pervert". She was the victim of a miscarriage of justice and was facing 40 years in jail. I don't find that particularly amusing.

  Pine Man 14:26 13 Jun 2007

Not that I am condoning what the Brigadier said but at the moment she is a CONVICTED pervert!

  beynac 14:33 13 Jun 2007

No, she is not! I suggest that you also get the facts:

"On June 6, 2007, a New London superior court judge threw out the conviction of Amero, she was granted a new trial and entered a plea of not guilty. The new trial date has not yet been set."

At the moment she is facing a new trial. Her conviction was thrown out.

  Pine Man 14:34 13 Jun 2007

Pheew - sorry.

  beynac 14:35 13 Jun 2007

Sorry, Pine Man - not Piney.

  beynac 14:51 13 Jun 2007

As you probably have realised, I feel strongly about this case. It has serious implications for anyone who uses computers.

At the moment, if you have pornographic pictures on your computer, the assumption would be that you downloaded them. Everyone would deny it, therefore any denials are disregarded.

There are a lot of infected computers out there. A simple click of a mouse can download all sorts of malware. A lot of computers contain things which their ownerer didn't consciously download. Large numbers are zombies being run as botnets under third-party control. The owners of these computers can have no idea what is being downloaded.

It is vital that the authorities continue to crack down on the distributors and users of child pornography, but it has to be realised that the world has changed Malware has become a lot more sophisticated in the relatively short time that I've been helping people clean their computers.

Julie Amero was effectively fed to the wolves by people trying to cover themselves. She is a victim. There have been others. There will be more. Are you 100% sure exactly what is on your computer?

  Jak_1 16:26 13 Jun 2007

The link gives very little detail about the case, however, one would have thought that a school computer would have had popup blockers etc installed and running! Also it assumes that she is innocent, that is probably the case but we only have the word of the article for that and no evidence as such!
Non of us want porno popups on our pc's, I have popup blockers running and do regular malware scans, have up to date av and a decent firewall.

I would prefer to have the evidence from both sides in front of me before making judgement about guilt or innocence, anything else is conjecture.

  brundle 16:35 13 Jun 2007

More to read here; click here

  spuds 16:35 13 Jun 2007

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Fujitsu Lifebook P727 laptop review

Best of the Grad Shows 2017: University of the West of England (UWE)

Best value Mac: Which is the best £1249 Mac to buy

Les meilleures GoPro 2017