Saturday, February 3, 2007

Contribute to Julie

You can contribute to Julie Amero to support her and her efforts to defend herself by clicking on this button:








These payments go directly to Julie -- no middleman -- and will be used to help support her through these difficult times.

38 comments:

google said...

I'd love to help, but I'd like some minor assurance that this is on the up-and-up. How can an anonymous contributor be sure donations are truly going to Julie Amero's aid?

Jam said...

I will e-mail everyone who donates a personal thank you. Rest assured that this is a legitimate site for Julie Amero and all funds will be utilized for the sole pupose of bringing this injustice to it's rightful conclusion. There are no middle men or hidden costs. All funds are deposited into my account directly from PayPal.
Thank You All for your kindness.
Julie Amero

Dylan said...

Could you please post an update on what is happening to Julie Amero? Is she in prison? Is the case on appeal? I know a lot of people in the blogosphere and elsewhere in the country are keenly interested in how this case is going.

mikeconwell said...

>I'd love to help, but I'd like some minor assurance that this is on the up-and-up. How can an anonymous contributor be sure donations are truly going to Julie Amero's aid?

In addition to Julie's reassurance above, I can attest to receiving an email directly from her attorney advising me of the site and contribution method. As he and I have corresponded in the past on this matter, I have every reason to believe in this site.

Mike Conwell
Computer Consulting Co
Austin, TX
512.327.9669x204
http://www.state-v-amero.com

Rob said...

I've been following this since the story broke, and I am keenly interested in what other kinds of support might be forthcoming?

I haven't heard of any solidarity provided by other teachers. Man, there would be walkouts and a protest at the local legislature in a flash if that happened around here on the left coast.

Teachers, please speak up, speak out! Bring on those T-shirts and bumper stickers, raise awareness, demand a meaningful restitution for Julie.

Impeach the judge, demand the prosecutor's resignation, fire the lame school administrators.

A travesty appalling as this deserves as much attention as possible.

Good Luck, Julie, and hang in there! There are a lot of people rooting for you.

Farnsworth said...

I've just made a $25 contribution, and I have a link to the story and to your contributions page on my blog, One Pissed Off Veteran. I hope my readers will kick in with some spare change for you.
This is an outrage, a travesty, and I will be following the story closely.
Best wishes, Julie. My thoughts are with you.
--The F Man

Anonymous said...

The principle of the school and the prosecutor admit the computer did not have a firewall or ad blocking software because it was so old. On what grounds is Julie being condemed again? Who is the judge? what a pin head! Even with the latest in computer security your still rolling the dice everytime you log onto the web. And who is to say that these innocent 7th graders didnt do it as a prank. Get real people, your 7th graders are not as innocent as you might want to think. Check your home pc to see where it has been. You might be surprised what your 7th graders are watching these days. Throw this case out of court its ridiculous!

Bryan
St Louis, Mo

Wingnutamj said...

We do nothing wrong (not me at least). I think it's insane that the trial got this far. The computer is so old I'm surprised it wasn't recycled for money by the IT department(our schools need more funding, and not those in California or New York) I mean I used a computer like that except that it ran 98 until about a year ago and it was agonizingly slow going. I also doubt that a sub is expected to know to turn off the computer if this ever happened. Am I suppoed to believe that the sub brought with her a firewall at her own expense? NO! I also bet that the prosecutor and judge are enjoying their new Vista Ultimate top-of-the-line PC's right now to play minesweeper as they obviously aren't researching their facts!

Anonymous said...

The same thing happened to a man in the UK. He was cleared by a forensic expert.

Read the article in the link. It could clear you.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/28/suspected_paedophile_cleared_by_computer/

Anonymous said...

Good luck, Julie. Hope the donations can make life a bit easier, and hope to see the truth come out in the appeal as well.

Donald.

Anonymous said...

I just PayPaled $20. Wish I could do more.

A concerned citizen.

Anonymous said...

This is a case of a very serious accident waiting to happen, unfortunately, to a teacher. I have two of them in my family, and they have their students' well-being in mind, first and foremeost as I assume as a teacher, Ms. Amero, does. The responsibility here lies not with Ms. Amero, but with the school authorities to insure safety - physical and mental. Prosecute them, not this innocent victim and scapegoat of their negligence.

Wendy P. said...

I am PTFA chair person at my son's school here in the UK. Our school requires parental consent for children to be allowed to use the internet and as part of this agreement the school promises to have up to date filters, anti-virus and anti-malware software installed. I would imagine that this school has, or should have, a similar agreement. It sounds like you are being made a scape goat Julie and this is certainly NOT JUSTICE!

My thoughts and prayers are with you and your family and I will certainly pass this on to as many as I can to help in the "awareness" campaign.

Regards

Wendy

ohmbuoy said...

Absolute travesty of justice. Who are the totally obvious moronic idiots who call themselves representatives of the law? Even an average computer-literate grade 5 student knows more about anti-virus & antispyware precautions than does the "law of the land". To understand that Julie has been charged would be a large 'stretch' of the imagination of intelligent people; that she has been incarcerated by fumbling idiots who have obviously NO idea of how or what computers/internet function is UNbelievable. Someone, somehow, STOP the stupidity: NOW!!

Dona M. said...

Our thoughts and prayers are with you. Nearly everyone teaches school in my family and have for generations. I cannot imagine having to go through this for any of the them, but I know we would need help, too. We do need to stand up for the rights of the individual and to their right to due process.

I am so glad I saw the article by Ryan Russell of pcWorld magazine and could help with a $50 donation. I hope that the forensic experts can clear this up and that their work is accepted in a timely manner. Best wishes for your future!

Anonymous said...

I'm a student so I can't donate much. But I hope every little bit helps in this fight against stupidity.

So please give!

--Mike, San Diego

Lucian said...

This is truly an outrage. Ever since I first read about this a few weeks ago, I've been infuriated by the injustice. I believe Julie will be cleared of wrongdoing. I have sent you a small contribution to help fight this injustice.

Anonymous said...

what's happening to Julie Amero truly boggles my mind, I've been on edge and angry ever since I read about it last week, I can only imagine how horrible it must be for her and her family. There is NO excuse for the ignorance about technology that our legal system has displayed, zero, it's unnacceptable, it's seriously terrifying. My thoughts and prayers are with her and her family. I've tried donating, but the Paypal page times out/doesn't connect, I will try later, and I've told everyone I can about this matter.

Anonymous said...

This is a ridiculous outrage. I just contributed 20$, please keep us posted on how things are going and if you need more funds. I just moved in the U.S. from Montreal and I am shocked to see that somebody can face 40 years in prison for such a "crime". People are complaining the sentences are too clement up north, but this is simply inhuman. Lives are being destroyed.

Continue to fight. We are thinking about you. We are supporting you.

-Marc

PatG said...

Julie, you should have just turned off the monitor...
What a bunch of idiots. Didn't the computer testify. They should hook it up and watch the "spyware" take over. Machines so infected actually become unuseable.
Good luck, Julie

Anonymous said...

I just wanted you to know that you have many friends and supporters around the nation. It is my hope that you continue to fight this injustice. We stand behind you and please keep us posted.

Joseph said...

You got $100 from me.
I work at the helpdesk at Prudential Connecticut Realty in Rocky Hill and have been following this story since January.
Having been dealing with spyware/viruses etc for nearly a decade, I conclude that the only thing Julie is guilty of is a lack of computing knowledge.
What's happening to her is preposterous and I seriously hope that she doesn't spend the next 40 years of her life behind bars due to other peoples' irresponsibility.

Dennis Campbell said...

I am very happy to donate to such a worthy cause. I have just finished reading Nancy Willard's paper concerning your plight. It is probably the most thorough and informative piece published so far. http://csriu.org/onlinedocs/AmeroTragedy.pdf
After reading this I cannot believe the chain of incompotence. The inept police investigation, a prosecutor that makes Mike Nifong look like a choir boy,a jury with the collective IQ of a box of hammers, and a judge that did not see the need to have ALL the facts presented in his courtroom.
I truly believe you will win your case on appeal and a civil judgement on your behalf is necessary to punish the individuals who have made your life a living hell.
(By the way, have you heard from 60 Minutes, Dateline, or Primetime? This will make a good story, especially when you are finally exonerated)

Joseph said...

Can we keep a running total of how much money has been donated so far? My curiosity is getting the best of me!

greg said...

Um, can we get an address to where we can send a check?
Paypal wants my bank info, screw paypal, heh.
post it on the blog or send it to me via madlinux.com/contact.php

Thanks
greg

PS I also sent a note to the prosecuter and state representatives. Wish I could send hate mail to the stupid jury. Idiots. We'll fix this!

rictberg@hotmail.com said...

The spirit of the law gives life, the letter of the law kills. Keep faith in the spirit, I trust this case will add to the need to correct such injustices.
Please accept my contribution to Julie's cause.

Sue123 said...

Why is it that this Bridgeport substitute gets to cruise porn sites on the web in front of a 4th grade glass in Beardsley School, and all he gets is an escort out of the building?

Web site error for teacher

Author: SUSAN SILVERS ssilvers@ctpost.com
Date: April 8, 2006
Publication: Connecticut Post (Bridgeport, CT)
Article ID: 3687627


BRIDGEPORT - A substitute teacher was ordered out of Beardsley School last week for viewing "inappropriate" Web sites on a classroom computer, officials said. Mary Poppa, the Parent Advisory Council leader and a regular volunteer at the school, said three students complained to her after classes March 30 that they had seen the teacher looking at sexually explicit material via the Internet on a classroom computer. She said she relayed that information to the

Found in the CT Post archives:

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=CTPB&p_theme=ctpb&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=allfields(beardsley%20school)%20AND%20date(2006)&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date:B,E&p_text_date-0=2006&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced-0=("beardsley%20school")&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no

Richard said...

Cant afford much at the moment but we have sent you some funds to assist. Your story headlined in Sydney, Australia and I think its purely wrong. Heard it being discussed on the bus today.

All the best.

Anonymous said...

As a fellow teacher, I am shocked at the ignorance and maliciousness of the prosecutor and school officials. No one has doubted her guilt? No one has had the courage to say she just MAY have been caught up in circumstances beyond her control?
And the police "expert"? Shoots himself in both feet and the head: 'er, no firewall, no virus protection.....uh, what's a pop-up?' Doesn't seem to know that pornography sites REFUSE to let you exit. No, he can't be that stupid. I think this lady has got 'target' written all over her, and these guys think they are climbing over her to promotions.

Stu Edwards said...

It's hard to believe what passes for the legal system in your country. We read constantly about true criminals breaking the law and getting away with it, but it seems that the ones who, through no fault of their own, "break" it, get the raw end of the deal.

I, and everyone else I know who read this in Australia wishes you the best of luck in fighting these scurrilous charges. It seems you are the victim more of political opportunism than anything else.

In some countries this is called corruption. In the US it seems to be called "running for office".

Anonymous said...

I would donate if I was sure of all facts in the case.

1. PayPal takes a cut of your payments, so PayPal is a "middle man". It's incorrect to say there is no middle man unless PayPal have set up a special arrangement with you, or unless you're only accepting a small amount via bank. That alone makes me a little skeptical if you're 100% correct on all your other statements.

2. While I definitely agree that the defendant should not be liable for computer pop-ups, I'm not so sure that this case is just a question of whether it was computer pop-ups or intentional porn viewing. Isn't the issue more about what she did about it? Why didn't Julie turn off the monitor, cover the monitor, turn off the computer, or some other action that would have prevented it from being displayed (this does not require technical knowledge)? Just because it's a computer doesn't mean that you have no obligation to try to fix the problem if it's going wrong. What if you had a radio or a TV in the classroom which was broadcasting pornographic images regularly (but unexpectedly)? Isn't it the person's duty to turn it off or take action?

Most likely, this is probably a case of Julie being a scapegoat. However, I'm not sure that I understand the case completely, so for this reason alone I won't donate.

Also, just to be careful that you may not know all the facts of the story. Just because the story sounds bad or there is a blog post claiming innocence, doesn't mean you should bias yourself to one point of view without knowing all the facts, evidence, and arguments for the charges.

If you truly could not do anything about this, then I hope that you can appeal. Even if there was some small amount of negligence, 40 years sounds much too high. I would expect if that were the case, the sentencing will be much less than 40 years.

Anonymous said...

How about punishing and stopping people who put such images on the net in the first place?

If I put a threat of some kind on the internet just for fun the FBI, MI5, CIA, Scotland Yard and God knows how many other agencies would know in no time who I am, where I live and they will be after me but why these people who are polluting the Cyberspace cannot be caught or are not caught?

Tony Khouri said...

Just read about your injustice,it seems in some backwater towns in the U.S,the power of technology has yet to be fully understood.Everyone who has read this here in Norway understand fully that you are clearly innocent but it seems like the authorities have their heads stuffed so fully up their righteous arses that they simply want to make an example of you.Regardless of what some of those rednecks say,it is easy to prove your innocence in this case by simply following the time the pop-ups appeared after the children logged into the Hairstyle site.How stupid are those people???Do the words "Cache memory" or "Cookies" mean anything to the prosecution???.Good luck and I wish you well as do many here in Norway.If you wish to E-mail me,my address is tony.khouri@chello.no.

Anonymous said...

Farce, inaccurate, steamrolled justice. Its enough to make one lose all faith in the justice system entirely. You need a college degree to get a computer job, but apparently you just need to know what one looks like to be a presiding "expert" in a criminal case involving a computer. The supreme court should overturn this and give her back her life. Absolutely retarded situation.

Michael said...

Thanks for your nice post!

Anonymous said...

any current news on the situation? I am a student studying to be a teacher, and currently work in a school as an Aide. I was working on a presentation about teachers and the law and came across your case. I found it hard to believe that case is a real case... it seems so absolutely absurd. what is happening currently?

Anonymous said...

Now that the case is resolved are you still going to be accepting donations?

Injustice said...

To the anonymous commenter who asked if we are still accepting donations, I’ll offer this.
That’s a very profound and personal question, and I wonder why someone would travel this far back in this blog to find something of this nature. This is not the first of such questions regarding the donations within the past couple of weeks. The short answer to the question is YES. I say that only because we spent a lot of money to defend Julie against these unjust, unsubstantiated and collaborative charges against her. We will never recover from the debt and mental anguish that the perpetrators of this insidious cover up heaped upon Julie to protect their collective dairy air’s. From the school administrators who failed to act in a proactive manner to keep this sort of thing from happening in the first place and then failing to correct the problem when it did. To the police department who failed miserably in their investigation as well as the failure to safeguard and document the evidence (mainly the computer) from corruption by keeping a strict chain of evidence. And finally to the defense attorney who failed to disclose the basis of the defense to the prosecution which resulted in not having any expert testimony about the events of that day. You ask am I still accepting donations ? Yes WE are. We will accept donations of apologies from all or any of the people who used Julie as their scape goat for their personal gain. We will accept donations of apologies from the Norwich police department detective who was allowed to present inaccurate, unrelated and distorted evidence during the trial. We will accept refunds from the people who took our money under the pretense of experience and capability to professionally defend Julie. We will take donations to make up for the unjust revocation of Julies right to teach and earn a living. We will take donations for the indignity and degradation that was and continues to be thrust upon us.

wes