News from other sources
US: Pennsylvania prison inmate faces felony charges after spitting at another inmate.
HIV-positive York County prisoner allegedly spits on fellow inmate, faces felony charges
An HIV-positive York County Prison inmate faces felony charges after he allegedly spit in the face of another inmate, according to court documents.
X, 28, of Glen Burnie, Maryland, has been charged with assault by prisoner, aggravated harassment, making terroristic threats and harassment, according to court documents. He was arraigned on Thursday.
The charges relate to his behaviour at York County Prison where along with spitting in someone’s face, X threatened a correctional officer — repeatedly telling the officer he would shoot him, according to charge documents.
X told the officer that he would shoot him while his family watched. During questioning, X said once he was out of prison he would “handle it” and that “all he would have to do is tail” the officer home, court documents state.
He also told police that he was aware he was HIV-positive, according to court documents.
X was placed in York County Prison after police arrested him for disorderly conduct relating to an incident at the Greyhound bus terminal in August, according to court documents. He has been there ever since unable to post his bail.
Bail remains set at $100,000 for X, and a preliminary hearing is scheduled for Oct. 25.
Published in York Daily Record on October 14, 2018
US: Woman living with HIV and on treatment charged in North Dakota with class A felony for alleged HIV exposure
Woman facing HIV charge
A 28-year-old Watford City woman has been charged with spreading bodily fluids that may contain HIV, a class A felony.
Suwanisa Akkanimat was charged Monday and ordered held on $15,000 bond. Police said that on Friday they spoke to Akkanimat and a person with whom she’d had unprotected sex.
During the interview, Akkanimat told police that she hadn’t told the person, who was not named in court documents, that she had HIV before they had sex, according to an affidavit of probable cause filed in Northwest District Court. She did eventually tell the person that she was HIV positive and that she was taking medication for the illness.
Earlier this year, a 43-year-old man pleaded guilty in Williams County to transfer of bodily fluids that may contain HIV. Angel Rodriguez was originally charged in January 2017 with having unprotected sex with a woman without telling her he had HIV.
He was sentenced to 8 years in prison.
Published in the Williston Herald on October 15, 2018
US: New report by the Williams Institute shows clear disparities in enforcement of HIV criminalization laws in Florida
Study shows impact of HIV criminalization laws
Los Angeles – Florida laws that criminalize people living with HIV directly affected 614 people from 1986 to 2017, according to a new report by the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law. Researchers found that women were disproportionately affected by HIV criminalization. White women were disproportionately arrested for HIV offenses in Florida, and black women were most likely to be convicted for HIV offenses related to sex work. HIV criminalization is a term used to describe laws that either criminalize otherwise legal conduct or increase the penalties for illegal conduct based upon a person’s HIV-positive status. More than two-thirds of US states and territories have enacted HIV criminal laws.
“Our study shows that certain communities, whether defined by gender, race/ethnicity, or sex-worker status, are bearing more of the weight of these laws,” said lead author Amira Hasenbush. “What’s more, these HIV criminal laws, which were originally intended to control the spread of HIV by prosecuting individuals who expose others, don’t require proof of transmission or even exposure in most cases. So the laws are not doing what they set out to do.”
Key findings: Individuals were arrested under HIV-related statutes in 47 out of the 67 counties in Florida. The highest prevalence of HIV in the state is found in Miami-Dade (24%) and Broward Counties (18%), but those counties represent only 4% and 3%, respectively, of the HIV-related arrests. On the other hand, Duval County is home to only 6% of the people living with HIV in Florida but 23% of all HIV-related arrests in the state. Over half (56%) of all individuals arrested under an HIV-related offense were women. More than four in ten people arrested under an HIV-related offense were black (43%) and white women were more likely to be arrested for an HIV-criminal offense than other groups. Black men were more likely to be convicted of an HIV-related offense than white men and white women. Convictions for HIV arrests were twice as likely when there was a concurrent sex work arrest than when the HIV offense occurred outside of the context of sex work. Read the report Williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/HIV-Criminalization-Florida-Oct-2018.pdf
Published in Baltimore Outloud on October 13, 2018
Malta: Man accused of alleged HIV transmission found not guilty as no medical evidence to support the claim
Medical evidence crucial in HIV contamination case
An alleged HIV infection took place in 2012, but the only test carried out by the Court’s expert was in 2016 so there was no sufficient evidence to support the victim’s claims
The prosecution would have to present the medical records of the person charged with intentionally spreading HIV. This was decided in a judgement delivered by Magistrate Dr Aaron Bugeja.
The accused was charged with having HIV and knowingly transmitted the virus to another person or persons and he was also charged with transmitting HIV negligently. These charges are found in Article 244A of the Criminal Code.
The case in hand concerns a homosexual relationship where the virus was allegedly transmitted, therefore, although HIV may be spread in a variety ways, the court would concentrate on homosexual transmission of HIV. The charges are not directed at a person’s sexuality but on whether the person spread the virus.
Magistrate Bugeja pointed out that there is limited caselaw in Malta and therefore the Court also looked at English and Italian law.
The virus can be transmitted either by means of sexual activity or transmission of infected blood or fluids. In the case of sexual activity, the virus can be passed on from the active party to the passive party. The virus can be spread when both persons in the sexual activity knowingly have HIV or else none of them know that either or both have HIV. It is up to the prosecution to prove how the HIV was transmitted. On this the Court has to give special attention to the medical and scientific evidence. In order for a person to be guilty of these crimes the prosecution has to prove that the virus exists in the accused, that the virus was transmitted and it was transmitted to the subject of the crime. The victim of the crime, must obviously not have been infected before. The accused must either transmit the virus purposely or else negligently. In addition to this the accused must pass on the same type of virus he has and therefore, if he transmits a different type of virus, then he cannot be found guilty.
The fact that the alleged victim claims that he had unprotected sex with he accused, does not mean that the accused is guilty of the crime. Neither would he be guilty of this crime, if the accused admits to have sex with the alleged victim. The English and Italian judgement emphasizes the concept of responsibility and that the basic precautions must be taken when one enters into a sexual relationship.
It is not sufficient that the accused of this crime would be aware that he had HIV before six or else he should have known he has HIV. The Maltese law provides that the prosecution should prove beyond reasonable doubt that the infection was intentional or else took place negligently. The fact that the accused knew of his medical condition can be proved by his own admission or else by witnesses, but this has to be confirmed by medical evidence, either by a doctor or else medical records. This has to be objective by means of medical and scientific evidence. For the prosecution to prove negligence is more daunting as it has to be proved that the accused should have known he has HIV. There must be some indication that he has the virus and, therefore, could potentially infect any person he has unprotected sex with.
According to Article 244A(1) of the Criminal Code, the law provides that the victim should be infected with the virus and therefore should not carry the virus before the act that infected him. This is not necessary in the case of negligent infection as Article 244A(2) does not mention that the victim is not infected before the act of contamination. The legislation here is laying down a scenario where the victim may be infected, but not necessary the same virus the accused has. However, the prosecution still has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was infected by the accused.
In this particular, the prosecution produced as the main witness the alleged victim who was infected with HIV. The alleged victim told that court that he had his first homosexual sexual relationship with the accused and a few months later discovered he had HIV. He explained that he had sex for the first time with the accused. The court expert confirmed that in 2016 the accused had HIV. The accused testified that he did not know the alleged victim and did not have sex in 2012 and 2013 because he had haemorrhoids and underwent operations in Malta and abroad. For his operations he was tested and held that the results did not show that he did not have HIV. He explained that he did not do tests because he had a scare when he was diagnosed with cancer, when it was a mistake. He avoided taking further tests. The accused also told the court that he had a steady relationship with one man from 2013, but did not have sex during that year because of his medical problem and operations.
Magistrate Bugeja complained that the prosecution did not produce medical records of the accused and the alleged victim before the alleged relationship and after. The Court could have come to some sort of conclusion if both men had the same or different strains of the HIV virus. There was no medical evidence to show if the accused had, in fact, infected the alleged victim with HIV. The Court also pointed out that the alleged infection took place in 2012, but the only test was carried out by the Court’s appointed expert in 2016 and therefore, there is no sufficient evidence to support the victim’s claims
The Court in a detailed judgement concluded by finding the accused not guilty.
Published in Malta Today on October 12 2018
US: Mississippi woman arrested and remanded into custody for allegedly not disclosing her status
Knowingly exposing HIV
On October 2, 2018, at approximately 7:30 a.m., a complainant traveledto the Gulfport Police Department to initiate a report against X. The victim stated that he had unprotected sexual intercourse with X. The victim stated X had knowledge she was positive for HIV prior to having sexual intercourse with him and did not disclose to him that she was positive for HIV.
On October 9, 2018, on Harrison County Justice Court Judge Brandon Ladner issued an arrest warrant for X setting her bond at $50,000.00
X turned herself into the Laurel Police Department. Gulfport Detectives traveled to Laurel PD and transported her to the Harrison County Adult Detention Center
Published in WXXV News on October 12, 2018
UK: Man to stand trial in South Devon for not disclosing his HIV status, a requirement from a previous court order.
Man with HIV accused of having sex without telling woman about virus
Defalco, 57, will stand trial in February accused of breaching a sex ban notification order.
An HIV positive man from South Devon will stand trial accused of having sex with a woman without informing her about the virus.
James Defalco, 57, appeared at Exeter Crown Court via video link from prison charged with breaching the terms of his Sexual Offences Prevention Order.
It is alleged that he engaged in sexual relations with a woman without informing her of his HIV status, something he is required to do by an order imposed in 2005.
Defalco, of New Road in Brixham, entered a not guilty plea to the charge.
He was represented in court by Ms Ceylan Bayram who said the defendant maintained his innocence.
Prosecutor Ms Caroline Bolt said there would have to be a trial.
Judge Timothy Rose remanded Defalco in custody.
A trial lasting two days will take place on February 13 next year.
Published in DevonLife on October 11, 2018
The fight for justice in HIV must join the fight to decriminalise abortion to ease the burdens on the sexual and reproductive lives of women and girls
Criminalizing the right to health: The shared struggle of the HIV and safe abortion movements
UK: Man given a four-year sexual risk order by Southampton court for HIV non-disclosure and told to give police 24 hrs notice if he intends to have sex
Man told he must give police 24 hours before he intends to have sex
A man branded a ‘danger to women’ by a judge has been ordered to give police 24 hours notice every time he intends to have sex.
X must contact officers and provide the details of each woman he plans on having sex with and is banned from inviting any females into his home unless he calls police first.
A court heard the 44-year-old allegedly put ‘vulnerable’ women at risk by failing to tell them he has HIV by engaging in unprotected sex without telling them about his medical condition.
X has also been told he must inform women he has HIV before any sexual activity takes place and police will contact the women in advance to issue an appropriate warning
He has been given a four-year Sexual Risk Order and if he breaks it faces up to five years in jail.
He was served with the order at Southampton Magistrates’ Court, Hants, following a civil case brought by Hampshire Constabulary.
The court heard X, from Southampton, has not been convicted of any offence – however, he was alleged to have put “vulnerable” women at risk by engaging in unprotected sex without telling them he has HIV.
Detective Sergeant Craig Fielding, from Hampshire Constabulary, told the court X enticed women back to his home with promise of drugs and alcohol.
The court heard on one occasion a woman woke up to discover the lower half of her clothing had been removed.
She made a formal complaint but X denied raping her and there was insufficient evidence that sexual intercourse had taken place.
On another occasion a woman allegedly woke up to find her clothes torn and blood on her legs.
The court was told O’Neill locked her in the flat for several days.
He was arrested but denied committing any offences and the woman was not prepared to support a prosecution.
DS Fielding said: “It’s almost as concerning as an incident can be – holding someone against their will and allegedly raping them.”
US: Michigan Bills that would change criminal penalties around HIV disclosure and transmission still being worked on
Bills dealing with criminal penalties surrounding HIV still in committee
Lawmakers in Lansing are still deciding whether to change criminal penalties surrounding disclosing one’s HIV status.
The state House recently passed a group of bills aimed at modernizing the state’s policy on HIV.
But two bills that were originally part of the package are still in committee. Those would lower criminal penalties for people who knowingly and intentionally spread HIV to another person. Right now, it’s a felony to do that.
Representative Hank Vaupel (R-Fowlerville) is chair of the committee that still has the legislation. He says the bills are being worked on – but they weren’t ready for a vote last week.
“Hopefully we can come to a point where we will be able to pass them out and they will not endanger people, and yet will not put someone in jail if they didn’t know and didn’t disclose,” he says.
Supporters of the bill say the current penalties are a disincentive for people to get tested.
Representative Jon Hoadley (D-Kalamazoo) is a bill sponsor. He says some people don’t get tested because of this law.
“As we expand testing opportunities and treatment opportunities, we should take the threat of felony imprisonment off the backs of folks who are keeping themselves healthy and their communities safe,” he says.
Russia: Man sentenced in Novosibirsk to two years in settlement colony for alleged HIV transmission
Novosibirets intentionally infected a friend of HIV: he was given a real term
(Google translation, for original article in Russian, please scroll down)
The prosecutor’s office is confident that the convict knew in advance about his diagnosis
On Tuesday, October 2, a trial in the criminal case on the intentional infection of a woman with HIV was completed in Novosibirsk.
Her acquaintance was on the dock.
“He was assigned two years of imprisonment in a settlement colony,” Svetlana Levshakova, state prosecutor and assistant prosecutor of Zaeltsovsky district, told the NGS correspondent.
According to her, the Novosibirets knew that he had HIV, and in March 2017 he intentionally infected a woman’s acquaintance during sexual intercourse. It happened in the Zaeltsovsky district of Novosibirsk.
In more detail about the circumstances of the incident, the state prosecutor did not tell, explaining that she could not do this without the consent of the victim – we are talking about disclosing the details of his personal life.
The representative of the prosecutor’s office added that the man was tried behind closed doors. Zaeltsovsky District Court of Novosibirsk found him guilty under Part 2 of Art. 122 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (infection of another person with HIV by a person who knew that he had the disease). The verdict has not yet entered into force.
As Svetlana Levshakova specified, the convict did not admit his guilt: he insisted that he “had no intent” to infect a woman.
Previously, a similar case was handed down by the Kirovsky District Court: a 32-year-old man received a real sentence for infecting his partner . The girl learned that he had HIV, after sex.
Published on NGS RU on October 3, 2018
Новосибирец намеренно заразил знакомую ВИЧ: ему дали реальный срок
На скамье подсудимых оказался её знакомый.
«Ему назначили два года лишения свободы в колонии-поселении», — сообщила корреспонденту НГС гособвинитель, помощник прокурора Заельцовского района Светлана Левшакова.
По её словам, новосибирец знал о том, что у него ВИЧ, и в марте 2017 года намеренно заразил знакомую женщину во время полового контакта. Это случилось в Заельцовском районе Новосибирска.
Более детально об обстоятельствах случившегося гособвинитель рассказывать не стала, пояснив, что не может делать этого без согласия потерпевшей, — речь идёт о разглашении подробностей личной жизни.
Представитель прокуратуры добавила, что мужчину судили в закрытом режиме. Заельцовский районный суд Новосибирска признал его виновным по ч. 2 ст. 122 УК РФ (заражение другого лица ВИЧ-инфекцией лицом, знавшим о наличии у него этой болезни). Приговор в законную силу ещё не вступил.
Как уточнила Светлана Левшакова, свою вину осуждённый не признал: он настаивал на том, что у него «не было умысла» заражать женщину.
Ранее приговор по похожему делу вынес Кировский районный суд: 32-летний мужчина получил реальный срок за заражение своей партнёрши. Девушка узнала, что у него ВИЧ, уже после секса.