HIV/AIDS transmission - To prosecute or not to prosecute?

[Ally68]

Surely it's murder if he knowingly infects his partner with HIV. Truely is sickening. Selfish B******!

[snooze]

should get done for biological manslaughter. i knew a man who had hiv he was v. careful, didnt want to risk someoneelses life. and told people he knew he had it so they had a choice. also knew a young girl who lost her vaginity to a bloke only to find out shortly after that he had infected her, though dont think he knew at the time and told her when he did. like the movie KIDS. ones who do know and pass it on should get done, though there are many who have it and dont know till is too late. safe sex is a must these days, theres also a risk of hepatitis, another killer

[Thunzi]

I'd just like to add as well there have definitely been cases where women have deliberately attempted to infect men, it's not a one way issue.

 

I read about a case a few years ago where a prostitute offered an unprotected service to men when she knew she had HIV. These men then went home to their wives girlfriends etc. The prostitute was attempting to ruin more than her customers lives in her angry lash out at the world. Although the risk of women to man infection is very low it does still exist.

[JoeP]

But i can't be. What if the man decrees that he didn't know he had the condition, or even implies that he was unaware of knowing what HIV meant. - Using ignorance as a defence.

 

It needs its own classification, because its important enough to warrent its own class.

 

But many of these cases are being considered when people ARE aware of what they're doing and that they have the illness.

 

The problem with giving it it's own classification is that you end up having to be VERY careful in how you phrase the law. For example, by being very specific in your wording - to the level of defining the particular viruses concerned - you will end up having to modify the law whenever new viruses that fit the 'class' come along - or even when new strains are discovered.

 

I don't necessarily think it's wise or sensible to try and produce laws based on particular events - this Government is pretty dreadful at drafting legislation in this way.

 

As things stand, if someone was genuinely unaware of their status (how you might define that I have no idea) then there's no case to answer. Where people are aware then it's assault / attempted murder.

 

The problem / advantage here is that it would also be applicable to soemone who has, for example, herpes or something similar and knowingly passes it on. That can then be assault. The MAJOR problem here is where do you stop....do you prosecute someone for giving you a cold? That would be ridiculous but might be viewed as a logical progression.

[sTaGeWaLkEr]

I believe that if anyone, male or female, has unprotected sex with another person without informing them of their positive status, this should be a prosecutable offence.

 

Although we now know that HIV/AIDS isn't the automatic 'death sentence' that it once was, due to HAART (Highly active anti-retroviral therapy) potentially it is still a threat to life, and most certainly a threat without access to medication.

 

I believe attempted murder would be an appropriate charge (assuming that corroborative evidence is available)

 

I think the analogy of a common cold Joe would probably be a base for a lawsuit in the states........if it hasn't already been done.

[JoeP]

There's an interesting analogy in the application of law in this area and the application of laws in the early days of computer hacking.

 

Before the creation of the specific Computer Misuse Act, people carrying out computer crimes were often prosecuted for 'Theft of electricity' and 'Use of a forged instrument' - the latter an offence going back to the 19th Century.

 

This approach was followed for a few years in the 1980s with a mixed amount of success, and then new laws were bought in after suitable study and thought.

 

The important thing with any law like this is that it needs to be structured and implemented in such a way that it punishes and acts as a deterrent BUT at the same time needs to be enforcable with existing legal and scientific methods.

 

That's the part I'm not sure of - I'd say :

 

Yes, we need a law

No, it shouldn't be JUST aplicable to HIV because that is quite inconsistent and almost harks back to the witch hunt times of the early 1980s

How it should be written to be effective and sensible - God knows.

[dieselbabe]

Surely it's murder if he knowingly infects his partner with HIV. Truely is sickening. Selfish B******!

 

 

I feal the same and always have. I think it is kind of manslauter as the person not knowing will die if get infected with HIV/Aids. Like when my X partner when he sleep behind my back with a woman with no protection, i was straight down to the GUM clinic and thankfully for me i did not catch anything as he knows how i feal about it with seeing a friend of mine that died of Aids and i was more mad that his could put me at risk then him sleeping about. But i remeber telling him IF she had giving him a STD or even worst HIV and passed it on to me then i would do my very best to get them both done as to me it is manslauter as they would have ended my life span. I do not still get why some people still to this day do not protect themself just for a bit of fun that could lead to death if they not careful.

[Cyclone]

I understand that more people now take responsibility for their own sexual health and practice safer sex, but as most of us will probably we aware, this isn't always the case. There are still a large number of people who continue to have unprotected sex, despite being aware of the potential risks.

 

The majority of the people that I know with HIV are responsible, considerate, genuine and honest individuals. Most were simply 'unlucky'. One is a fifty-something Grandmother who uses the forum. She had sex once in ten years and became infected. Not everything is as we imagine it to be.

 

Anyway, on with the reason for my post.

 

This is based on a real situation.

 

Mr 'X' is currently having unprotected sex with unsuspecting partners, even though he knows he is HIV positive. He doesn't tell his multiple sexual partners his status but insists on unprotected sex as 'he prefers it that way'

 

This is clearly unacceptable behaviour. I understand that the individual in question may be 'angry at the world' and want to lash out, but this is not the way to behave.

 

I was pleased to hear that only a few days ago someone has reported Mr 'X' for infecting them with the virus. I genuinely hope that this will result in legal action being taken against the individual concerned and that he will be held responsible for his actions.

 

(for legal reasons I won't be commenting on the specifics of the individual case)

 

Previously I understand that HIV positive people who have had unprotected sex whilst being fully aware of their status have subsequently been prosecuted. I believe the legal term penned was 'Biological Manslaughter'

 

There are many potential problems with HIV prosecutions, but in essence, should HIV+ve people who have unprotected sex be open to prosecution under the law, and if so, what would be a suitable sentence?

 

Are there any mitigating circumstances that would lessen the severity from a defence perspective?

 

Should we be allowed to do whatever we want sexually without fear of repercussions or do we all have a moral obligation to protect others?

 

As mentioned before, there are HIV+ve people on the forum, so please keep all replies sensible and courteous.

 

I've read the thread.

You should report 'Mr X' immediately to the authorities. Like right now, go and pick up the phone and do it now.

 

 

That's done?

Then your duty is discharged, it's no longer your problem.

[Tony]

It's a bit like having somebody sit in a chair that unbeknown to them has a dozing 10' alligator underneath it. You might be lucky, you might not, but the owner of the alligator has knowingly subjected the person to a high probability of a painful death.

 

Sounds like manslaughter to me and murder at a push. Lock up time. Call the Police to prevent a crime.

[rosie]

Good god this is scarey stuff stagewalker what a wicked thing to do putting all those peoples life at risk and these inocent people not knowing and then the chance of them giving it to someone else .He needs to be reported for this its selfish and wicked.