Man Guilty in Serial HIV Assault CaseFollow

Guess the thing here is that he knowingly had unprotected sex. If he hadn't known he was HIV positive, then you worry about setting a bad precedent. Infact I'm not even sure this is precedent, believe there was a case in Fla. about this several years ago.

We studied a case like this in my Civil Torts Class. Most states hold that if you knowingly expose anyone to a dangerous condition, you are liable for civil charges for monetary compensation. The idea of a person being criminally liable is just following from the precedence set in the civil cases.

Btw, the fact the women were less than pure doesn't have any bearing on the guilt of the person passing on the disease. The key is that he knowingly passed on the disease with the required aforethought ("he would give it to as many people as he could.") to show he had an "evil" intent.

The first thing my Crim Law Prof told the class was to NEVER say you would do anything bad under X circumstances (ie: I would love to Kill Mr.Bob) to anyone else....if that situtation actually occurs, you will likely be the person accused, whether you did the act or not.

Edit b/c I can't spel after Midknight

Edited, Tue Nov 9 01:34:19 2004 by Decsr

o.O kinky

Angry - it doesn't mean that the women involved slept with 10 men each. It means that the exposed people include a vector of everyone he had sex with, everyone they had sex with, everyone their partners subsequently had sex with, and on and on. Each woman might have had one or two partners subsequent to having had sex with him, but the disease vector is potentially much larger than that.

This is what makes containing communicable disease so challenging. STDs are even more so because of the stigma involved, and HIV in particular because of the privacy laws surrounding it (because it was a "gay" disease and gays were justifiably nervous about being singled out for vigilante punishment).

At any rate: if he knowingly, even deliberately, had unprotected sex with anyone after he was diagnosed without informing them, he is indeed liable for damages. He has condemned five women to death by his actions, and who knows how many of those vector cases.

Anyone who has unprotected sex with people like this meth smoker is taking risks. Now they're pissed and want revenge on him. I agree that this case sets a poor precedent with no proof that he knew that he had HIV.

Now, if there's real proof that he knew that he had HIV, then there's a case. Just use a court order to undo Doctor/Patient Privilege and check his medical records.

ok... he screwed em knowin he had the virus, proof discovered while he was in jail, they have the records to prove it... so in my book... hes guilty... hang by the neck till dead, cuz hes a murderer now...

As for the sluts comment... do you realize that if just ONE of those girls has just A SINGLE other male sexual partner, it could be spread to the 20 other women that man screws??? Probly not...

and the guy screwed 17 girls himself, as if that isnt bad enuff... hes a 2 bit ***** everybit as much as any girl who sleeps with 10 guys on average.... think before you judge...

heheh and sounds like hes pissed at the world for his misfortune of getting HIV, so he plans on sharing the love and destroying hundreds of lives just because he couldnt keep his **** in his pants, or take the precaution of using a condom and common sense...

to the original poster... who is more stupid? the woman who has unprotected sex, or the man who who willy nilly engages in sexual activity with multiple partners as he pleases with out protection?

answer... both... so dont be posting that the womans a ***** and act like its her fualt for not usin protection... its everybit as much his fault... they consented, leaving them both open, so it makes them both stupid... but hes even more to blame because he engaged in this behavior knowing it would kill people...

Edited, Tue Nov 9 13:14:15 2004 by Maddstarr

But then how will we succeed as animals?

Was it good AIDS or bad AIDS?

Aww, this means no more a[/b]ss-to-as[b]s parties?

SamuriX,

This only goes to prove hes a murderer, and deserves to get whatever punishment god sees fit for him to have.....

That's really sick... and unoriginal. They started putting the little air bubble in condom wrappers because in the 80s some really conservative (and mentally unstable) Catholic(s) who didn't believe in birth control went through a drugstore and poked holes through the packages. At least that's what I've heard, may have been urban legend. (I wouldn't buy an opened box of condoms :P)

Laviont, stop being a moran. Then you should also never **** outdoors for fear of hitting exposed electrical cables, never walk the dog for fear of a piano falling on your head, never vote for fear of another Bush family member being elected, etc. There are all kinds of things you can do that are supposed to be safe that you could hurt yourself doing. The difference is, while you could get cut or burned while cooking, someone else deciding to set fire to you or cut your intestines out is what is referred to as 'malicious intent' and that makes it not an accident, but a crime where the blame is squarely on the shoulders of the perpetrator.

The werid thing is that one of the girls is pregnant with his child and claims to be in love with him, despite everything he has done.