Check out our advertisers www.risingstarpr.com www.auditionporn.com/tour1, www.eruptionxl.com www.sexucrave.com and www.vantagedist.com/page/manufacturers/id/1895/manufacturer/Brandxxx_Pictures.html; www.galaxypublicity.com

Follow Gene Ross at twitter@GeneRoss3; Follow AdultFYI at twitter@Adultfyi1

STOCKTON, California – from www.recordnet.com – A hearing over the 2012 firing of a Lincoln High School special-education teacher accused of operating four pornographic websites on a district-owned laptop computer resumed Monday following a 96-day hiatus.

The teacher, Heidi Kaeslin, is contesting her firing in a proceeding at the district’s Brookside Farmhouse that has many of the trappings of a courtroom trial.

The case was put on hold because of scheduling difficulties after the district presented its side during eight days of testimony in October. Now, the attorney for the 37-year-old Kaeslin has the chance to present his client’s defense. Hearing dates have been reserved this week, next week and the last week of February in a case that first came to public light 15 months ago in a story in The Record.

Questioning of Kaeslin’s computer forensics expert continued for hours Monday after testimony resumed.

Some of the initial testimony focused on Lincoln Unified’s allegation that the objectionable material included inappropriate images of Kaeslin’s young, naked children.

The expert, Don Vilfer of Roseville-based Califorensics, said a key provision of his agreeing to analyze the contents of the teacher’s laptop and iPhone was that if he found child pornography, he would turn it over to law enforcement. Vilfer defined pornography as material that involves sexuality or “appeals to the prurient interest,” and he said he found none.

“Many people have pictures of their children naked,” Vilfer said.

Repeatedly and without fail, Vilfer said the images he viewed, whether they were of children or adults, did not qualify as pornography.

During one sequence, Kaeslin’s attorney, Tom Driscoll, handed stacks of photos of the contents of the laptop to Vilfer and asked him to describe them to the administrative law judge and the two panelists who will rule on Kaeslin’s case.

Among the photos Vilfer described was one of a clothed woman putting a water bottle into her mouth, another of a clothed woman pulling at her top while holding “a gray object” in her right hand and another of one woman standing in front of a second, kneeling woman.

Of the last one, in which both women also were clothed, Vilfer said he couldn’t “tell what they were doing” in the photo. Judge Rebecca Westmore asked Vilfer to try to describe “what’s going on” in the photo. Vilfer said it appeared one woman was simulating performing oral sex on the second woman, who was pretending to be a man.

“I would describe it as silly rather than pornographic,” Vilfer said.

Attorneys for both sides declined comment Monday, as did Kaeslin.

Lincoln Unified has alleged that Kaeslin’s district-issued laptop included “thousands” of pornographic images and videos; about 75 files “related to adult entertainment and pornography businesses” and websites she and her boyfriend were developing; and about 100 photos, mostly of her young daughters “in naked and sometimes provocative poses.”

Once testimony is complete, presumably this month, the panel is expected to issue a written ruling – a process that could take several more weeks. After the panel rules, the losing party will have the opportunity to appeal the matter in court.