Minn. Supreme Court sides with HIV-positive man

Aug 21, 2013 Full story: Seattle Post-Intelligencer 42

This undated photo provided by the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office in Minneapolis shows Daniel James Rick, who is HIV-positive.

Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#1 Aug 22, 2013
If the republican orgasm police keep on with this micromanagement insanity; people will be suing each other for spreading the common cold virus
Julius

Netherlands

#2 Aug 22, 2013
What difference does it make. All queers have AIDS anyway.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#3 Aug 22, 2013
This is all messed up.

In my book, Mr. Rick is guilty of negligent homicide.

Actually, we need a new legal terminology for this.
Bernard

United States

#4 Aug 22, 2013
Julius wrote:
What difference does it make. All queers have AIDS anyway.
Well said and spot on!!!
Sick of Bigots

San Francisco, CA

#5 Aug 22, 2013
Julius wrote:
What difference does it make. All queers have AIDS anyway.
And all russians are kgb crooks.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#7 Aug 22, 2013
Julius wrote:
What difference does it make. All queers have AIDS anyway.
If that is true then you have nothing to bitch about do you?

It's VERY TELLING that you insist we all have HIV yet you are terrified you'll catch it!

Short of shooting up the only way you can pass this on is via sex.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#8 Aug 22, 2013
snyper wrote:
This is all messed up.
In my book, Mr. Rick is guilty of negligent homicide.
Actually, we need a new legal terminology for this.
And yet you are strangely silent when it comes to pursuing criminal actions against people who spread other deadly diseases.

OH wait.

It's not a crime to pass those on.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#9 Aug 22, 2013
snyper wrote:
This is all messed up.
In my book, Mr. Rick is guilty of negligent homicide.
Actually, we need a new legal terminology for this.
How about "personal responsibility" when one has unprotected sex?

Oh wait that's way too complicated!
Big Boob Babe

Alpharetta, GA

#10 Aug 22, 2013
Julius wrote:
What difference does it make. All queers have AIDS anyway.
And all homophobes have teensy weensy weenies and that disappears completely when they sit down to type dirty on TOPIX
Sheldon

Alexandria, VA

#11 Aug 22, 2013
snyper wrote:
This is all messed up.
In my book, Mr. Rick is guilty of negligent homicide.
Actually, we need a new legal terminology for this.
That might be true if the person he infected died. Persons with HIV who take their meds are as likely to die of old age or car accident as they are from AIDS. And you would have to take the word of D.B. that Rick didn't disclose his HIV infection prior to having sex. The jury didn't believe D.B., so why should we when they heard all the evidence, including having the ability to assess D.B.'s credibility on the witness stand.

In truth, this shouldn't be a criminal matter at all. There is no allegation that sex was not consensual. The sex took place in 2009 when every adult capable of giving consent to sex knew full well that having unprotected sex can lead to infection with HIV among other STDs. There is no allegation that Rick tricked or coerced D.B. into having unprotected sex.

The criminal law doesn't serve to protect people from their own faulty judgment. From the story, there is no proof that Rick was even the person who transmitted the virus to D.B. The implication is that D.B. might have been in the habit of having unprotected sex, perhaps with strangers. Meaning, if Rick actually did disclose that he was HIV+, he might have been the only person that D.B. could blame, having felt remorse for his own decision to have unprotected sex once he seroconverted.

Our choices and actions have consequences. Justice is not served by a criminal conviction in this case when the so-called victim is equally responsible. And that's not blaming the victim. That's just common sense.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#12 Aug 22, 2013
Sheldon wrote:
<quoted text>
That might be true if the person he infected died. Persons with HIV who take their meds are as likely to die of old age or car accident as they are from AIDS. And you would have to take the word of D.B. that Rick didn't disclose his HIV infection prior to having sex. The jury didn't believe D.B., so why should we when they heard all the evidence, including having the ability to assess D.B.'s credibility on the witness stand.
In truth, this shouldn't be a criminal matter at all. There is no allegation that sex was not consensual. The sex took place in 2009 when every adult capable of giving consent to sex knew full well that having unprotected sex can lead to infection with HIV among other STDs. There is no allegation that Rick tricked or coerced D.B. into having unprotected sex.
The criminal law doesn't serve to protect people from their own faulty judgment. From the story, there is no proof that Rick was even the person who transmitted the virus to D.B. The implication is that D.B. might have been in the habit of having unprotected sex, perhaps with strangers. Meaning, if Rick actually did disclose that he was HIV+, he might have been the only person that D.B. could blame, having felt remorse for his own decision to have unprotected sex once he seroconverted.
Our choices and actions have consequences. Justice is not served by a criminal conviction in this case when the so-called victim is equally responsible. And that's not blaming the victim. That's just common sense.
And what about the conflict between laws like this and HIPPA rules?

These laws were passed because of fear not science. The blood ban is one example. It is just as likely that heterosexuals who have unprotected sex can become infected. These laws make criminals out of people who took enough personal responsibility to get tested in the first place.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#13 Aug 22, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>And yet you are strangely silent when it comes to pursuing criminal actions against people who spread other deadly diseases.
OH wait.
It's not a crime to pass those on.
The issue hasn't come up.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#14 Aug 22, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>How about "personal responsibility" when one has unprotected sex?
Oh wait that's way too complicated!
What about walking alone late at night without a gun?

The murderer still knows what they're doing.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#15 Aug 22, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
What about walking alone late at night without a gun?
The murderer still knows what they're doing.
But as someone already pointed out, this man didn't cause anyone's death.

Frankly I'm shocked that a member of your order would condemn someone for a crime they didn't commit.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

#16 Aug 22, 2013
snyper wrote:
This is all messed up.
In my book, Mr. Rick is guilty of negligent homicide.
Actually, we need a new legal terminology for this.
Vectoring would be a good term to describe exactly this sort of crime.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

#17 Aug 22, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>But as someone already pointed out, this man didn't cause anyone's death.
Frankly I'm shocked that a member of your order would condemn someone for a crime they didn't commit.
The fact of the matter is that he knowingly spread HIV to an uninflected person. To make an analogy, what if I handed you a glass of apple juice, told you to drink it, and I told you it was poisoned, but you did it anyway? I'm sure if that were the case there would be charges of some sort. Allegedly, this man did tell his partner, but decided to have risky unprotected sex anyway. That is negligent. It is not the sex act itself nor a question about consent, but rather, it's about him not taking personal responsibility nor considering the health of his partner or that of the public. That is why he is a criminal. People who act that way are a danger to public health, and for that matter, if his partner knew what he was doing (like drinking poisoned apple juice) so is he. Such would be analogous to committing suicide, and believe it or not, attempted suicide IS a crime.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#18 Aug 22, 2013
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
Vectoring would be a good term to describe exactly this sort of crime.
so would stupidity

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

#19 Aug 22, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>so would stupidity
Well, if the government could charge people with the crime of stupidity, we'd have double the current prison population, but stupidity isn't a crime. Egregious negligence resulting in harm to others, however, is.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#20 Aug 22, 2013
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, if the government could charge people with the crime of stupidity, we'd have double the current prison population, but stupidity isn't a crime. Egregious negligence resulting in harm to others, however, is.
There is also the legal principle of shared liability.

The uninfected person is as guilty as the driver of the car that was used by the bank robber who murdered the clerk.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#21 Aug 23, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>But as someone already pointed out, this man didn't cause anyone's death.
Frankly I'm shocked that a member of your order would condemn someone for a crime they didn't commit.
Suppose I give you a long-acting carcinogen ... say ... plutonium.

Am I any less a murderer?

Compare the cases against Big Tobacco, and the people of Hinkley, CA. vs PG&E.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Health Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Pregnancy Symptoms - 12 Very Early Symptoms of ... (Jun '07) 24 min Tahlia boo 6,020
ERCA's smoke free outdoor spaces initiative get... 41 min what about campfires 1
Last flu shot clinic is Jan. 8 at Halton Region... 46 min Del 1
CDC, PHARMA, And Mainstream Media On The Same Team 2 hr VACCINE SPECTRUM ... 2
Should Santa Claus still be fat? 2 hr Vince 1
What is the functions of back stretching devices? 2 hr Jasson Stella 1
El Paso's Clean Air Ordinance in effect startin... 5 hr UR BS 9
More from around the web