Detective Speaks Out in Teacher Porn Case
Yesterday, you read what a juror on the Amero case had to say.
Today, comments e-mailed to me from Detective Mark Lounsbury, the crime prevention officer with the Norwich Police Department.
Dear Mr. Bass, Unfortunately the truth in this matter is yet to be told to all those who were not located in the courtroom during the trial. Those in the courtroom saw and heard the truth. Once sentencing is done the truth CAN BE presented to the world IF they want it. I'm thinking the world doesn't want to hear the truth. IGNORANCE IS BLISS. The lies are exciting, bringing up STRONG emotions. OMG, that poor person, victimized by the Evil Government and its minions.It continues to amaze me how people can base their opinion on what is fed to them. Did anyone ask the Expert for the evidence he recovered which would support his claims? The "curlyhairstye script", those pornographic googlesyndication.com generated pop ups? BUNK also known as errors of commission. Would you like to know the truth? Once sentencing is over I'd be more than happy to let you see the source code, scripts, etc.
I've received allot of calls and emails regarding this. All from people interested only in TELLING me their opinions or TELLING me they're going to get me. Not once has anyone called or written me to ASK me a question. They apparently have what they want. I work hard every day for the victims of crime. I search for the truth not for me but for them. If what the newspaper reported about my testimony was my actual testimony, taken in context, don't you think there would have been some consequences, a rebuttal, something.
Feel free to write if you wish.
Mark Lounsbury
I had tons of questions and fired them back in an e-mail, offering Lounsbury an opportunity to talk about "my actual testimony, taken in context." Unfortunately, this was his response:
Dear Mr. Bass, Once the sentencing phase for this case is done I can answer all your questions. I have all the information you seek. My opinion is not important but I am fleshing out a theory concerning site blocking software which was in place and how to circumvent it. I can provide you w/ the source code showing all the .htm and javascripting for each web page, images from those pages, date/time of creation, MD5 hashes, etc. I will contact you after sentencing. Thank you,Mark Lounsbury
Monday: What you can do.
PC World's Marketplace
PC World's Free Whitepapers
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
I was unaware Norwich Conn. is the "Porn center of the USA." Mark "Loony"bury has forgotten to mention his month off due to drinking beer on duty. Oh, and was this suspension received during andother porn investigation? I have a question Mark. What did you get caught doing this time for your slanted investigation? It appears the whole community is 10 hairs short of being baboons.
I was unaware Norwich Conn. is the "Porn center of the USA." Mark "Loony"bury has forgotten to mention his month off due to drinking beer on duty. Oh, and was this suspension received during andother porn investigation? I have a question Mark. What did you get caught doing this time for your slanted investigation? It appears the whole community is 10 hairs short of being baboons.
Our justice system was supposed to protect us from mass hysteria and mob rule, by being deliberate and impartial, by granting every opportunity to the accused to clear themselves.
Today, our justice system is a cesspool of incompetence, indifference, and deception. This poor lady is a victim of not only the reprehensible hackers that plant traps on the Internet, but also of a court and prosecutor who are interested only in crass political grandstanding. The sad truth is that if she could have afforded a more skilled and "connected" defense attorney, all of this courtroom malfeasance would have been exposed early and dealt with, and the judge and prosecutor would have been more cautious about their behavior. We can only hope that an appeal will be supported by those with the most to lose (teachers in general) to get the best legal counsel suited to the job.
Finally, the blame comes back to you and I, who as citizens have the ultimate responsibility to throw out corrupt officials.
It seems to me that a very important outcome of this decision is that, at least in Connecticut, the actual suppliers and purveyors of adult-themed adware and malware are -not responsible- for the content that -they- put on someone else's computer. This world gets scarier and scarier by the day.
Scary is right .....
[Sarcasm}Let's see ... she gets 40 years for this while an Ohio couple who caged their special needs children get 2 years (and are currently free pending) ...... makes sense to me I guess ...[/Sarcasm]
Ohio story here: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1521244220070215
Scary is right .....
[Sarcasm}Let's see ... she gets 40 years for this while an Ohio couple who caged their special needs children get 2 years (and are currently free pending) ...... makes sense to me I guess ...[/Sarcasm]
Ohio story here: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1521244220070215
Number 1 people are way to uptight about porn now a days, yeah its everywhere, do your job and be a parent..
Number 2 How old were these kids 10-12? Have they failed to interogate the kids to see if it was them who were accessing the porn sites since they claim it was not pop ups. I saw my first nudy mag in 89-90 when i was 10-12 years old. Imagine what a kid now a days could find since the advent of the internet. My money is on the kids, they were viewing the porn sites because they thought, ohh a subsitute teacher, we can be bad. Then you get one kid, whos probably from a deeply religous family go home and blow things out of proportion. Still, were are the schools safe guards, blame falls squarely on them. Welcome to our prisonplanet.
This is another modern day witchhunt. Instead of a tribunal of sickos searching innocent women for warts and moles or the mark of the devil (as in Salem in the 1600s)...we have a jury calling for the burning of a bumbling, computer illiterate, substitute teacher. If this is the way it is going to go....all people who work with children are taking their lives in their hands.
Dear Roughneck:
Your comments are inappropriate in the extreme. You are out of line to make insulting comments about the detective and community. Also, his history (whatever the facts about THAT may really be) are not relevant to the outcome of this case.
Please restrain your comments, or someone may get the idea that you are not too many hairs above the community you insult.
Lounsbury is just simply lying. He does not have any evidence that he will present. It would have been revealed during discovery. Lounsbury was stupid to say that a highlighted link means a site was intentionally visited and too small to admit he was wrong or lying. Lounsbury's remarks about the site blocking software in case are stupid. The school board already admited their software was 4 months out of date. Yes, I have talked to the expert about the scripts. Lounsbury is the one with ommisions and lies. After March 2 you will see him come up with another excuse.
The facts will come out. Mark will be shown to be a fool at best, perjury is more likely, but he'll get off with being an ignoramous.
Mark gave false testimony and it will be proven.
Actually, Roughneck's comments about Lounsbury's history of beer and the job are relevant as a good indication of how Mark "works for the victims of crime."
Oooohh... Lounsbury cansend you the source... THE SOURCE! With images! He's got to be an expert!
Puh-lease.
Being able to rip the source code from a web site is simple. Understanding what that code means and how it works is totally different.
Mark... you're a 'tard... go have another beer.
Lounsbury:
“Unfortunately the truth in this matter is yet to be told to all those who were not located in the courtroom during the trial. Those in the courtroom saw and heard the truth”
What in the world are we going to hear? Did she actually encourage the kids to “oh, now, try this link here, that really has some cool porn”? Or, did she get up on the table and start doing a dance or something? The point is, what in the world did she do, or not do, that is worth 40 yrs in prison? I really can’t imagine that there is anything I would hear once the “facts” get out that would cause me to think “give her 40 years! She deserves 40 years!”
If only she would’ve actually had an “inappropriate relationship” with one of the kids, then she probably would’ve gotten less then 5.
How about we give 40 years to every dad who left a Playboy mag under the bed, or in a drawer or wherever, that was found by their kids (and shared with their friends)? How about we give 40 years to every parent who’s left an x-rated video around somewhere that that their kids (and their friends) found and watched. If this is so serious, why do we allow internet access in the first place, especially in schools?
I’ve got a lot of questions about what happened, (being a computer person that’s worked in a school system, and know how hard it is sometimes to get through the tie-wraps and other obstacles to actually turn a computer off), but, if detective Lounsbury insists that there’s more evidence to come, I’m willing to wait. But, 40 years? I’m sorry Lounsbury, I just don’t buy it.
Well, the transcripts are released and the only truth I see is that inadequate forensics were performed on the hard drive, the IT Admin Hartz lied under oath when he claimed he had never, ever seen a screen fill with popup windows, the defense attorney overlooked significant and exonerating details and the judge just had no clue.
Lounsbury, where's the smoking gun exactly? I'll tell you: In the hands of the Norwich justice system, but certainly not Julie Amero's.
Lounsbury's credability is certainly suspect here. His qualification to evaluate the evidence... compared to Herbert Horner with 40 years of experience, and charged with saving corporations millions of dollars, is definately in question.
He has taken two FBI certifications on cybercrime and has some "continuing education" classes, yet he claims that the software he is using can tell between a user initiated click and one started by a pop-up when the maker of the software says their program doesn't do that!
This guy is a loon.
Unfortunately the irony of Detective Lounsbury's involvement in this case has been lost on most other residents of Southeastern CT. The facts surrounding his suspension for drinking on the job are public knowledge - he was actually escorting an underage girl on a liquor store sting and bought and consumed beer during the sting (and offered it to the young girl as well). He actually entered one of the stores they were attempting to sting prior to send in the girl. After she filed a complaint, the police then boycotted her parents Dairy Queen store (to their financial detriment), which is where they made contact with the girl to begin with.
Quite the defender of the innocent.