So, part of me really has a tough time with this one. Honestly... any computer investigator should be able to track the history to see just how these sites or "pop ups" were acquired.
The whole thing sounds really fishy... Despite my intense passion for searching for artistic nude shots of Madeline Albright.... the most racy pop ups I've seen are the occasional adult friend things which are PG. Additionally, why wouldn't pop up blocker be installed? Don't most PCs have at least a 4 year old copy of Explorer on them? Isn't this a standard feature? And lastly don't most schools use Macs, which are even less likely to fall victim to the pop up charades?
It sounds like either someone has something out for this woman.... (She's being framed), she's some sort of sicko, or she is extremely irresponsible. I'm guessing the latter is the case.
Using "strict orders" as an excuse to NOT shut the computer off sounds, like a crock of sh*t to me. Sounds like she was either unaware kids were looking at porn (seventh graders... with access to a uncensored PC... yeah they'll do the responsible thing) and is trying to cover it up..... or she saw it and felt it was only worthy of a mild deterrent. I mean... if you are serious about the teaching profession, and children.... isn't your first reaction going to be to rip that sucker out of the outlet or shut the monitor off??? And report it immediately to the principal and IT. I mean this isn't stuff you want to mess around with....you could end up... well exactly where she is.
A juror echoes my sentiments:
"So many kids noticed this going on," Steinmetz said. "It was truly uncalled for. I would not want my child in her classroom. All she had to do was throw a coat over it or unplug it. We figured even if there were pop-ups, would you sit there?"
I mean what sort of teacher goes... "Duhh.. gee better not shut it off...I's got mee some strict orders.."
Of course with that being said, one could, and should argue that the teacher should not be the only one held accountable. If the parental locks are implemented, as they should be in a school, such crap should be prohibited. The following suggests that someone else in the chain wasn't doing their work either:
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.
But Fain also said Amero was the only one to report such a problem: "We've never had a problem with pop-ups before or since."
No firewalls... IT is guilty then too, and lastly if Amero did report it, when did she report it? Before or after a parent complained? If its before this is a case of someone trying to damage her reputation I'd say. (although it doesn't explain why she didn't shut off the computer) If it is after... then prosecution has the case wrapped up, regardless of whether its pop ups or not.
This woman, bottom line, can't use simple logic in the classroom and shut off this PC displaying porn. This makes her a bad leader, & irresponsible. Even if she isn't to blame of the origin of questionable content, it clearly seems she dropped the ball on rectifying the situation. This is common sense.
Beyond the convicted woman, this case is a clear example of poor accountability in the public education system. In these times the Internet is not a trivial thing, and access to it by children should be taken seriously. This school administration was negligent, obviously on the training of the substitute teacher, and admittedly on their infrastructure.
No comments:
Post a Comment