Man kills girlfriend after finding out she has HIV

[rigoremortis]

I find it depressing how many people have the mentality that because a person has done something wrong it's okay to do pretty much anything to them.

Not informing a sexual partner you have an STD is terrible. That makes absolutely no difference to the morality of murdering that person however.

ya, it is rather sad. but, the argument could be made that she knowingly gave him longterm death, and he knowingly gave her short-term death in response. its not justified, its not right, but after i was done fuckin', if my partner rolled over and said "oh, btw.....you're gonna die a very slow, and eventually insanely painful death....sorry about that HIV positive thing!" i'd prolly be a little pissed, lol


either way, a beatdown is merited, murder is not.


heres some notes on what some states will do to ya though, if you're caught knowingly transmitting:

United States

As of the end of 2008, 36 states in America had prosecuted HIV positive individuals for criminal transmission or HIV exposure, with many having laws specifically mentioning HIV.43 Some states punish those convicted of offences such as prostitution or rape more severely if the person knows they have HIV. Spitting or emitting HIV-infected bodily fluids at another person while in prison is also an offence in some states. Failure to disclose one's HIV status to a partner is most often the only necessary basis for prosecution, rather than intent to infect someone else or actual transmission of HIV.44 At least nine HIV-positive individuals in the US have been sentenced for spitting with sentences ranging from 90 days to 25 years.45 A sample of the laws are below:46

Alabama – Engaging in activities likely to transmit an STD is a class C misdemeanour.
California – Engaging in uninformed, unprotected sexual activity (exception for consent) with the intent to infect the other person is a felony punishable by up to 8 years in prison.
Colorado – Committing or soliciting prostitution with knowledge of being HIV positive are class 5 and 6 felonies.
Florida – Unlawful for person with HIV, with knowledge both of their infection and risk of sexual transmission, to have sex without disclosure and consent having taken place.
Michigan – It is a felony to engage in sexual penetration, however slight and regardless of whether semen has been emitted, without informing the other of his/her HIV status.
Missouri – It is a class B felony to expose a person to HIV if defendant knowingly acted in a reckless manner without knowledge and consent through oral, anal or vaginal sex. If complainant becomes infected, the charge is a class A felony. The use of a condom is not a defence.
New York – The applicable part of the law is reckless endangerment in the first degree for engaging in ‘conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person’.
Pennsylvania – The state Superior Court ruled in a 2006 case involving oral sex that HIV positive people who do not disclose their status to their sexual partners can be charged with reckless endangerment. It follows that any kind of unprotected sex without disclosure could be prosecuted.
Texas – HIV transmission cases have been brought to court under aggravated assault laws whereby a person “intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly… uses or exhibits a deadly weapon as part of an assault”. Saliva of an HIV infected person is considered a deadly weapon

whats a felony in most states, is just a misdemeanor in Alabama.....not like we'd be missing too many savants/geniuses anyhow, haha

[imgoing]

I’m pretty sure about 4 years ago I was watching the news someone was arrested for premeditative murder I think cause she had a 1 night stand with a guy in a bar he gave her hiv without telling her so she proceeded to go out every night and have "relations" with diff guys to spread the "love" around that she had received just to pay back all men.

[rigoremortis]

Sure I think it was wrong not to tell him but I dont blame her one bit

depending upon which state she lives in, she has a legal obligation to tell him, she didnt, what he did was not justified, but she definitely holds some of the blame in this situation, as if she would have told him, he could of decided either A) to get a condom and hope for the best or B) not go through with it. I dont believe anyone's gotten the death sentence for knowingly transmitting, but its considered a felony in more than half the states in this country.

from texas (where they live):

Texas – HIV transmission cases have been brought to court under aggravated assault laws whereby a person “intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly… uses or exhibits a deadly weapon as part of an assault”. Saliva of an HIV infected person is considered a deadly weapon.

[Darsithis]

Actually at some point it will be come resistant to it and you will swap meds to try to breed out the resistance to it, and yes it can take a long time but eventually that will happen it's hit and miss with viral mutations.

Not always. If I'm perfect with taking them, it's a very low chance that I'd become (or the virus) resistant. Of course, if I don't take care of myself and I regularly miss my meds that could very well happen to me.

because its against the law to not disclose that you have HIV/AID's to a sexual partner, and if you do so without mentioning it (knowingly, as she did), and they get HIV/AID's, then you can get a murder 1 charge.

Oh I know that. That doesn't answer my question...why should she die?

[rigoremortis]

Not always. If I'm perfect with taking them, it's a very low chance that I'd become (or the virus) resistant. Of course, if I don't take care of myself and I regularly miss my meds that could very well happen to me.



Oh I know that. That doesn't answer my question...why should she die?

oh, i dont think she should of died. thats a bit extreme. however, in the heat of the moment, its hard to say what any of us would do in that situation. i do NOT however condone his actions.

but for example: i walked in on my ex of over 4 years with another guy, he knew it was my place, and that she had a boyfriend, he did it anyway, i walked in and beat the living shit out of him (so much so, that he had to have reconstructive surgery to his face and jaw), i literally blacked out during this process, was charged with assault, and got off scott free on a technicality of "crimes committed within the heat of passion". which is more or less, a temporary insanity plea, ie i literally blacked out from anger/frustration of the situation, and have no recollection of what i did.

once again, not justifying what he did, but there are times in life when we see/hear something that is so upsetting/angering that we lose control. not saying this happened to him, but if it did, i can personally understand it. thankfully, even in my blacked out state, i somehow knew murder was wrong and left before i did.

[Rinoa]

It's murder. Justifying that is no easy task - saying she had HIV certainly doesn't cut it.

[Moadar]

Murder wasn't the correct response. That said she is partially to blame for his reaction. Humans are animals and she should have expected violence when she dropped a bomb like that on him. Certain circumstances can drive normal people into murderous rages.

[Mikhail86]

If you found out that someone who knowingly has an STD(especially a life threatening one) basically played "russian roulette" with you without your knowledge would you be calm? For most people I highly doubt they would, murder is unjustifiable, but HIV does tend to change people's lives massively. A lot of people just don't understand the difference between HIV and AIDS and as a result that's probably why he lost it.

[Annapolis]

Sources, please.

source: http://journals.lww.com/jaids/pages/...&type=fulltext

I'm not going to post the exact numbers here because I think it would make people trivialize the possibility of the transmission. But if you're truly interested they are in the results. It is important to note that the transmission can happen at any encounter, but the data do show that his assumption that he based his murder on was probably incorrect.

[Dylamoo]

source: http://journals.lww.com/jaids/pages/...&type=fulltext

I'm not going to post the exact numbers here because I think it would make people trivialize the possibility of the transmission. But if you're truly interested they are in the results. It is important to note that the transmission can happen at any encounter, but the data do show that his assumption that he based his murder on was probably incorrect.

*facepalm* I hope you looked at the sample size and sample size, and date which factors in greatly. You do state that transmission can happen at any encounter so i'll give you credit for that but going off of this source would be completely asinine. Also when you deal with a case like this you can't base data to reasonably argue his case, He obviously didn't know any better and if he did he wouldn't have done the thing he did, you'd have to argue this to prove your point so if i were you i'd start re-evaluating and convince people that ignorance is truly not a premise to commit murder. When he will face court it is likely this kind of argument will come into play, that or insanity.


Also more news for you guys about the situation, the murderer speaks about the situation and i think this covers up a lot of empty holes. It seems he can definitely plead insanity also he still didn't take the HIV test so this will definitely cause more controversy. For those who haven't seen the video, he states they have been having unprotected sex for over a month, he also states that she was being cavalier(lack of care) about possibly giving him HIV which caused him to snap while confronting her about the situation of possibly giving him HIV. For the video http://landing.newsinc.com/shared/vi...on=nydailynews what do you guys think about the situation now? and what kind of sentence do you think he should get with the new information? he currently faces the possibility of the death sentence.

[Ron Burgundy]

couldnt the lawyers make a case that it was a "heat of passion" killing and that he was so angry that he temporarily lost control?

[shopatrick]

I dont know if I would have killed her but close to it. You only get 8 years for murder here. Out in 6 with good behavior. AIDS sucks man

[Kerath]

couldnt the lawyers make a case that it was a "heat of passion" killing and that he was so angry that he temporarily lost control?

I expect they'll do something like that. Although I guess the fact that he tried to burn the evidence, didn't turn himself in and shows no remorse will probably work against him. Then there's her children - the fact that he left her corpse to be discovered by her young children will probably work against him too. People react strongly when children are harmed (whether directly, or indirectly - as is the case here).
Tough case to call - don't know which way it'll go.

[PizzaSHARK]

I expect they'll do something like that. Although I guess the fact that he tried to burn the evidence, didn't turn himself in and shows no remorse will probably work against him. Then there's her children - the fact that he left her corpse to be discovered by her young children will probably work against him too. People react strongly when children are harmed (whether directly, or indirectly - as is the case here).
Tough case to call - don't know which way it'll go.

Safe to assume they're going to try some kind of bullshit "he wasn't in control of himself when he did it!" excuse, though.

[Annapolis]

*facepalm* I hope you looked at the sample size and sample size, and date which factors in greatly. You do state that transmission can happen at any encounter so i'll give you credit for that but going off of this source would be completely asinine. Also when you deal with a case like this you can't base data to reasonably argue his case, He obviously didn't know any better and if he did he wouldn't have done the thing he did, you'd have to argue this to prove your point so if i were you i'd start re-evaluating and convince people that ignorance is truly not a premise to commit murder. When he will face court it is likely this kind of argument will come into play, that or insanity.

Well first of all the sample size is large enough because they were able to create a reasonable confidence interval with 95% confidence. 95% confidence is the standard for a large majority of studies and they met that standard. Is being 95% confident that it is within those intervals really that bad? In addition their sample size may not be that huge but that is the nature of this research. Do you know of a study with a smaller confidence interval and higher sample size looking at heterosexual transmission at single contact?

Also I'm not sure why you're advising me to change my argument. I have been consistently arguing that ignorance is not a reason to commit murder. Look back at my recent posts.

[Deleted]

The death penalty is in effect in Texas right? I'd love the irony if he fried for what he did.

[Xether]

Can someone answer me this. If HIV is so easy to deal with(medically),the infection rates are so low, and the people who have it are so informed and responsible, how come it keeps spreading? Correct me If I am wrong but it is spread from a carrier to someone else. It really brings to the forefront how many HIV carriers are like Typhoid Mary.

[Deleted]

Can someone answer me this. If HIV is so easy to deal with(medically),the infection rates are so low, and the people who have it are so informed and responsible, how come it keeps spreading? Correct me If I am wrong but it is spread from a carrier to someone else. It really brings to the forefront how many HIV carriers are like Typhoid Mary.

Well a lot of people arent responsible, having unprotected sex before getting tested, even if youre a couple!
This guy got tricked wich is very sad but he should have had safe sex anyway, or both got tested before engaging
what she did was bad, but he's just as stupid. Are those few minutes of pleasure really more important than your health? thats just sad.

[Deleted]

She gave him a death sentence. Why should he not give her the same?

Now the next person coming in will say : is he dead? did he get infected? do you know how low the rates are of getting infected as a man?
Its not me asking though, i don't care for all the above it still sux to be put in such a position.

[Kasierith]

She gave him a death sentence. Why should he not give her the same?

She possibly (as in, very small chance) gave him a death sentence that would have killed him years down the road. He killed her on the spot. You want to try to say these are the same?