Up to 40 years for porn????

[SlasZ]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6729905.stm

This is the story of that schoolteacher and some porn popups that were shown to some young kids. The jury actually found her guilty the first time , but new evidence and a couple of experts showed that she did nothing wrong.

But come one... 40 years for something like that?? While Paris got 45 days for driving drunk (with the risk of hurting people).
I'd love to kick some common sense in that jury

Djeez, frustrating

[Guitardude86]

If it was jury-technique for dummies you could get away with it..

[5074charvel]

40 years for this - no wonder the US don´t have an unemployment problem.

[fett]

I thought they kind of gave up acting after about 33 years. You wants to see a porn star sagging and shagging? That's what I thought this thread was about.

[shobet]

I thought they kind of gave up acting after about 33 years. You wants to see a porn star sagging and shagging? That's what I thought this thread was about.

You've not explored the darker corners of the net then old boy.
There is some weird stuff out there, have a google for veiny women...
Just make sure you're not eating at the time!

[Norton]

If I had got 40 years for that, I'd escape and kill the jury members.

[GodOfRhythm]

40 years?! Just another sign about how absolutely insane the level of sexual taboo has gotten in the US .

[marcus]

She "impaired the morals of children". She should get a medal for that!

[marcus]

Also, it appears that she was not actually sentenced to 40 years. What she was convicted of carries a potential 40 year sentence, but she has not been sentenced yet.

[Endrik]

I don't get tired of saying this..... hyper conservatism is the evilest thing in the world right now

[wilkinsi]

40 years if you DON'T bribe someone?

[marcus]

There is usually a range of allowed sentences for crimes of a particular nature. The exact process varies from state to state, sometimes sentencing is done by jury, and sometimes by the judge. It is unclear based upon the article which was going to do the sentencing in this case. It is also unclear what the minimum allowed sentence for this crime is. My guess: probation. Saying that she could have gotten off on probation doesn't make for as sensationalistic of a news article, however.

This being said, it is of note that at the sentencing proceeding, she did not get 40 years, she got a new trial based upon new evidence. I honestly do not find what happened that shocking. However, the fact that they have a crime called "impairing the morals of children" (whatever the hell that means) in Connecticut is kind of a head scratcher. It probably dates back to the Puritans who originally settled that area. And remember, those guys came from Europe

[nuclear banana]

This is happening in my town. Lots of issues.
1. Prosecutor offered probation with no time/sentencing, which was turned down. He then threw the 'max' at her.
2. Not once did she turn off the PC, she basically panicked.
3. The 'expert' police investigator does not know his work - industry experts have found tons of flaws in his testimony/report. I have a relative on same police force who supports this (off the record).
4. The school was found to have spyware/ blockers out of support and not working.
5. She claims PC ignorance - jury intially had hard time believing that in todays day and age.

There are others: look at www.norwichbulletin.com for all details

[sevser]

40 years!? Insane! The case should be dropped! I have a operator sitting right here that doesn't own a computer...Some people do and still don't understand them. Rapists don't even get those sentences!

Kids seeing that is a horrible thing, but lets face it…Most have!

7th grade! I was sexually active already!

She was probably just horrified herself.

[Sparkytfl]

It was probably a year or two for each child that was there.