odd time signatures

Julie Amero is INNOCENT. Period.

UPDATE: I’m curious: Would you want your law enforcement officers to be writing stuff like this? It boggles the mind

No matter what the Norwich Bulletin and Det. Mark Lounsbury would like to believe, Julie Amero is innocent.

I really shouldn’t have to write this. AGAIN. But it seems that Detective Lounsbury is dissatisfied with the outcome of the case. For Det. Mark Lounsbury, this is a zero-sum game. Just like recently-disgraced Gov. Blagojevich, Detective Lounsbury continues to advocate for Julie Amero’s guilt in the public eye, using whatever tools are at his disposal.

Evidently the Norwich Bulletin doesn’t mind being his whore. They quoted and spouted his arguments, already proven factually incorrect over and over again, and never once mention the fact that the reason Julie Amero finally received some measure of justice was because the uber-conservative pro-law enforcement judge in her case ruled that Det. Lounsbury made erroneous statements in his testimony.

Erroneous is a nice word for lie.

Mark Lounsbury testified that Julie Amero had to have actively clicked porn links in order for the color of the link to turn red.

That’s a lie. Any visited link will turn color, no matter what mechanism causes the visit.

Mark Lounsbury testified as a forensics expert, yet he did not even use forensics software accepted by the industry as reliable and accurate.

He’s about as much of a computer forensics expert as I am, which isn’t saying much.

And now, he’s abusing his authority online and offline to persecute a woman who is INNOCENT, who should by all rights be receiving a nice fat apology and settlement from the state, but who is still having to defend her name and settle for “a settlement” of her case.

Enough is enough, Mark Lounsbury. You spout bullshit and call it evidence, you haven’t got a clue what malware is or how malware works, and you are no shining knight in armor out to save the brave town of Norwich from the likes of Julie Amero.

You are a bully in a bully pulpit, and you are drunk with your notion of power. So I’m going to reproduce some of your online gems here for the world to see and evaluate. When they read them, they might get a sense of who is being permitted to carry a gun and a badge in Norwich. (To the good people of Norwich, be afraid. Be very afraid. It could be you next.)

Here’s a challenge for Connecticut. Turn over the hard drive, ALL of the firewall logs, and other so-called ‘evidence’ that Lounsbury cites to Julie’s experts. Let them see everything. Let them evaluate it and make a report.

Of course, I wouldn’t expect the Norwich Bulletin to print it, but if they had even a drop of ethics they would. But I will. And so will many others.