Congo: First ever criminal prosecution nets 15 years for husband under poisoning law

The Criminal Chamber of the Court of Appeal of Pointe-Noire in Congo (also known as the Republic of Congo, or Congo-Brazzaville – not to be confused with its larger neighbour, Democratic Republic of Congo) has sentenced an HIV-positive man to 15 years in prison after finding him criminally liable for his infecting his wife. 

The sentence – which also included a payment of $100 million CFA francs (approximately US$210,000) –  as well as the prosecution itself has caused a great deal of controversy since sentencing was handed down on February 24th.

According to a March 2nd report by Inter Press Service Africa (in French here, and Google translated into English here) the case was controversial for several reasons.

First, the judge used his discretion to try Congo’s first ever criminal HIV transmission case by utliting the law on poisoning.

“The poisoning in our legislation is not limited. This is an administration or inoculation of substance in the body that cause damage or death,” Raymond Nzondo, lawyer for the victim told IPS.

This law was likely inherited from when Congo was part of France’s empire. However, French case law has now established that sexual fluids are not poisons, so the anti-poisoning law no longer applies.

Adding to controversy is the fact that an HIV-specific law, adopted by parliament in December 2010 but currently waiting to be enacted, now lists the circumstances in which criminal law cannot be applied to HIV transmission, with criminal liability limited to “intentional and deliberate” HIV transmission. The wording was changed following a workshop convened by civil society in 2009 in accordance with UNAIDS’ recommendations.

“This is illegal, this offense does not even exist in our legislation. I condemn this verdict,” Irenaeus Malonga, counsel for the accused, told IPS. He added that he had “already appealed to the Court of cassation [Congo’s court of appeal].”

Local organisations of people living with HIV / AIDS have also condemned the verdict. “We do not recognise this sentence as it is illegal. We will organise actions to ensure the man’s release,” warned Thierry Maba, HIV-positive, president of the Association of Young Positives Congo, a nongovernmental organisation (NGO) based in Brazzaville, the Congolese capital.

“The state was supposed to protect us, but now exposes us now by trial. And (with) 15 years imprisonment for a patient, he will die in prison,” says Simon, 35, an HIV-positive man from Pointe-Noire.

The IPS article includes scant details of the actual case, but it does quote the man’s lawyer claiming that both husband and wife had other sexual liaisions during their ten year marriage which certainly would create reasonable doubt that her husband was only the source of the woman’s infection.

“Who knows exactly who brought the disease home? Is something imagined. Before they married, both spouses had their life, the only screening test is not enough to convict someone,” railed Maba.

To Malonga, counsel for the condemned, the expert analysis can not say with certainty that contaminated the first spouse. “The doubt is there! The woman slept around, the man also has slept around, and they were married then,” he said.

Adding to the doubt that husband was the source of his wife’s infection is the fact that he had been on tretament since 2000 – this fact was used to prove that he knew his HIV-positive status, but there was no argument made by his defence about reduced infectiousness on treatment.

According Nzondo, counsel for the victim, her husband was under treatment since 2000, but had said nothing to his wife. He therefore did not use a condom during sex. The woman then began to develop the disease in 2005.  “The man knew he was sick and was taking medication by hiding his wife. The fact was intentional and criminal,” said Nzondo. 

Evidence: Claims that phylogenetic analysis can prove direction of transmission are unfounded, say experts

I’m reproducing this news article I wrote for aidsmap.com in case anyone hasn’t seen it, because it is a really important issue.  Claiming that phylogenetic analysis is so reliable as to be able to ‘prove’ who infected who in a criminal court case is reckless and somewhat self-serving.

A report from the United States published last week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences claims to show for the first time that direction of HIV transmission from one individual to another for use as evidence in criminal trials can reliably be established by phylogenetic analysis. However, international experts in phylogenetics who have acted as forensic advisors in criminal courts tell aidsmap.com that the report “draws unwarranted conclusions”.

The report, co-authored by Michael Metzker, associate professor at the Baylor College of Medicine Human Genome Sequencing Center and David Hillis, a professor of evolutionary biology at the University of Texas, details the phylogenetic analysis methodology used in two criminal HIV transmission cases in the United States, in Washington State in 2004 and Texas in 2009, respectively.

These cases were only the second and third times that phylogenetic analysis was used as evidence in a criminal prosecution in the United States, despite at least 350 convictions under HIV-specific and/or general criminal laws for HIV non-disclosure, alleged exposure and/or transmission since prosecutions began in the mid-1980s (CHLP, 2010). Of note, both of these cases involved allegations of multiple heterosexual transmissions from a single source. Such allegations are extremely rare in criminal cases.

Phylogenetic analysis requires the use of complex computational tools to create a hypothetical diagram (known as a phylogenetic tree) that estimates how closely related the samples of HIV taken from the complainant(s) and defendant are likely to be in comparison to other samples.

The report refers to several recent studies (including a 2008 study from Keele and colleagues) which suggest to the authors that a “significant genetic bottleneck” may occur during HIV transmission, and that at least three-quarters of infections may result from a single virus. It also notes that since HIV evolves rapidly following initial infection, this results in “increased diversity of HIV sequences within a newly infected individual.”

However, the report argues that if blood samples are taken from the accused and complainant(s) “shortly after a transmission event” the population of viral sequences in one individual would be expected to be more closely related to the population in the other(s) than other populations of viral sequences used for comparison. This is known as a “paraphyletic relationship.” The paper then suggests that “paraphyly provides support for the direction of transmission and, in a criminal case, could be used to identify the index case (i.e., source).”

In both cases, the investigators were blinded as to the identity of the accused and the complainants, which was only revealed in court once they had provided their report to the prosecution. Again, in both cases, the sample they identified as being the source of infection was that of the accused. It is unknown how much weight the judge and jury gave to the phylogenetic reports, but it is known that the prosecution provided a great deal of supporting evidence – including, in the Texas case, contact tracing and HIV testing of most of the complainants’ prior sexual partners – and that it was the totality of such evidence that led to guilty verdicts and lengthy prison sentences in both cases.

The paper and its assertions have been widely disseminated via a press release and several articles primarily aimed at the scientific community. Such articles include quotes from the investigators that suggest their methods are unquestionably sound and it was this evidence alone that led to the guilty verdicts. “This is the first case study to establish the direction of transmission,” Professor Metzker was quoted in an AFP story with the headline ‘ Lab detectives use science to nab HIV criminals’.

He asserted to the American Statesman that “[our analysis] provided sound scientific evidence of the direction of transmission, and from that we could identify the source.”  The article also quotes the main prosecutor in the Texas case, who characterises phylogenetic analysis as “good evidence”.  Of note, the defence attorney in the case is quoted as saying they were unable to find an expert to testify in court against the reliability of Hillis and Metzker’s findings.

“It made a lot of difference in trying the case because we couldn’t find an expert for our side,” he said.

However, Professor Metzker’s claims and the paper’s assertion that he and his colleagues have established that their methodology is both a new and reliable method of proving the direction of transmission has been questioned by several international experts contacted by aidsmap.com. All of the experts have served as witnesses in criminal trials outside of the United States.

These experts all agree that phylogenetic analysis remains an informed but sometimes imperfect estimate of the relationship between viruses. Although there are a variety of methods by which it is possible to increase the confidence that the samples are very closely related in comparison to other samples, there could never be complete confidence that the defendant infected the complainant(s) based on phylogenetic analysis alone.

Anne-Mieke Vandamme, a professor at Leuven Catholic University and Rega Institute in Belgium, has serious reservations regarding the paper’s assertions. “This paper draws unwarranted conclusions,” she tells aidsmap.com. “There is still the possibility that there is a missing link, a consecutive transmission with an intermediate missing link. I would only use such paraphyletic clustering to exclude a direction of transmission. The elimination of all other possible contacts is something to be done outside the phylogenetic analysis.”

Jan Albert, a professor at the Karolinska Institute and Karolinska University Hospital in Sweden, tells aidsmap.com that “the study suggests, but does not prove, transmission between the examined persons. The main reason for the caveat is that the analyses do not exclude the existence of unsampled persons belonging to the same clusters. The paraphyly does not exclude this possibility. In light of this it is surprising that only 20 local controls were investigated in the Washington case and none in the Texas case.”

Thomas Leitner, staff scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory in the United States, tells aidsmap.com that the methodology described in the paper to test the hypothesis of direction of transmission is not, in fact, new, and that along with co-author Walter Fitch he published a paper outlining a similar methodology eleven years ago. (Leitner T, Fitch WM 1999) He adds that his research suggests that even when all persons involved in an alleged transmission chain are sampled, it may still be the case that the two closest samples in a phylogenetic tree are two individuals who may not have ever met.

Professor Vandamme is also lead author of a paper currently in press with The Lancet Infectious Diseases along with several authors including Professor Albert and Dr Anna Maria Geretti, of University College London Medical School, Royal Free Hospital, in London, which highlights the substantial risk of miscarriages of justice based on a flawed view of the science behind phylogenetic analysis. It concludes, in concurrence with a briefing paper co-authored by Professor Vandamme and Dr Geretti and published by NAM and NAT in 2007, that the only ‘safe’ use of phylogenetic analysis in criminal HIV transmission cases is to exonerate the accused.

A fuller discussion of how phylogenetic analysis and other evidence can – and cannot – be used to establish the fact of transmission from the accused to  complainant(s) in a criminal case can be found in the ‘Proof’ chapter of NAM’s new international resource, HIV and the criminal law.

References

Scaduto DI et al. Source identification in two criminal cases using phylogenetic analysis of HIV-1 DNA sequences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, published online before print November 15, 2010, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1015673107, 2010.

Abecasis AB et al. Science in court: the myth of HIV ‘fingerprinting’. Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2010 (In Press).

Center for HIV Law and Policy (CHLP) Ending and Defending Against HIV Criminalization: State and Federal Laws and Prosecutions, Vol.1, CHLP’s Positive Justice Project, First Edition, Fall 2010.

Leitner T, Fitch WM The phylogenetics of known transmission histories. Pp. 315-345 in K. A. Crandall. Molecular Evolution of HIV. Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD 1999.

South Korea: Court refuses arrest warrant for teenage sex worker alleged to have exposed 20 men without disclosure

A 19 year-old female sex worker from the southern port of Busan was picked up by South Korean police last week after her father alleged she had unprotected sex with up to 20 male clients since testing HIV-positive in February.

However, according to an AFP report in The Straits Times

the court in Busan rejected a request from police to issue an arrest warrant for the woman, saying she should instead be sent to hospital for treatment.

A second report, from Asiaone.com notes that the young woman

reportedly said she suggested using contraceptives but her male partners refused to do so.

Of note, South Korea has no HIV-specific criminal laws.

In 2009 a 26-year-old HIV-positive man became the first person prosecuted under the country’s public health laws for having unprotected sex without first disclosing his HIV status. The man reportedly had sex with at least ten women. He received an 18-month prison sentence. The case occasioned calls for tougher laws for such conduct.

Canada: Gay man in Ottawa accused of HIV exposure charged with attempted murder faces further charges (update 2)

Update: August 18 2010

The 29-year-old man gay accused of not disclosing his HIV-positive status to several men before otherwise consensual sex now faces 26 charges in Ottawa and further five charges in Kitchener according to the latest update from Canada’s gay newspaper and online resource, Xtra.ca, which continues to report responsibly about the case by not disclosing the names of the accused, unlike the mainstream press.

According to court documents obtained by Xtra this week, the accused is now facing 26 charges: four counts of aggravated sexual assault, four counts attempt murder, five counts of sexual assault, eight counts of breaching probation, and one count of child pornography possession. He is also facing a total of five charges In Kitchener for similar offences, including three counts of aggravated sexual assault and two failure to comply with probation conditions.

A 24-year-old co-accused Kitchener man also accused of not disclosing his poz status is facing two charges of aggravated sexual assault. He and the Ottawa accused man allegedly had a foursome with two other men in Kitchener. He has been on house arrest  since May. His next court appearance is scheduled August 24.  The accused has a Kitchener bail hearing scheduled there via video link on Aug 27. He was arrested on May 6. By the time his next Ottawa Sept 9 court appearance happens, he will have spent more than four months behind bars.

Update: June 30 2010

The 29-year-old man gay accused of not disclosing his HIV-positive status to several men before otherwise consensual sex has had his charges upgraded to include attempted murder, according to a report in the Ottawa Citizen.

The four counts of attempted murder were laid against [name of man] in relation to four of his alleged victims. [The accused] has also been charged with four counts of administering a noxious substance — HIV — to the four men. It now brings the total number of charges against [the accused], who is still facing 14 charges of aggravated sexual assault as well as multiple counts of sexual assault and breach of probation, to 31. [The accused] also faces seven charges in Waterloo on similar accusations.
[He] was arrested in early May after an 18-year-old Ottawa man [allegedly] contracted HIV after the two had unprotected sex several times in January. A bail hearing for Boone, which began Tuesday, is expected to continue next week. The evidence presented during that hearing is subject to a publication ban.

This is the third person to face attempted murder charges in Canada since the murder trial of Johnson Aziga.

In related news, a few weeks ago, Xtra.ca ran an article explaining to HIV-positive, -negative, and untested gay men what the law in Canada actually means. In particular, it highlights that Canada’s focus on non-disclosure is sending the wrong message: disclosure is “a lousy strategy for staying HIV-negative.”

Only having sex with negative guys? Think again. “Is asking your partners if they have HIV before having bareback sex a good way to prevent HIV transmission? The answer is no,” says Murray Jose, executive director of PWA Toronto. There are two main reasons for this. Firstly, according to the Canadian AIDS Society, about 20,000 Canadians — or 30 percent of Canada’s HIV population — are HIV-positive and don’t know it. Secondly, while most poz guys are committed to ensuring HIV ends with them, it’s a difficult subject to broach, meaning many people — whether poz or neg — have trouble discussing it, especially in the heat of the moment.

Original post: May 11 2010

The good news from Canada didn’t last long. Within hours of the not guilty verdict in Vancouver, another gay man from Ottawa was being vilified in the press following an inappropriate press release from the Ottawa police.

Excellent work is being done following the intricacies of the case by Noreen Fagan and Neil McKinnon reporting for Xtra.ca.

They highlight the concerns amongst gay and HIV-positive advocates in Canada, and quote a regular blog reader, Michael Burtch, who is also a friend of the accused.

“It’s a witch hunt is what it has turned into. It’s very frightening for a lot of people in the HIV community to see what’s happening,” says Burtch. “The feedback that I have been getting from talking to people is that they feel as though it could just as easily be them. So there is I think a very strong swelling of support for [him] from the HIV positive community who feel a lot of empathy for his situation.”

Burtch is critical of the way the accused has been portrayed by the police and the mainstream media.

“Basically he is being presented as guilty before he has even had a trial. And all the actions that the police have taken are really just continuing to dilute the public health messages that practicing safer sex is everyone’s responsibility. I think we are really going to see that this is going to have a negative effect on testing in the city and its definitely going to have and effect on stigma and fear, discrimination and prejudice that HIV positive people are already dealing with on a daily basis.”

“I think that the Ottawa Police, despite their best intentions, have done a real disservice to the HIV community. And I am disappointed in the police liaison committee, I wish that they could have done more for him.”

Kathleen Cummings, the director of the AIDS Committee of Ottawa, agrees. She says that, while people may forget a name, they’re more apt to remember a face. “This is going to affect him for life,” she says.

Michael had previously been in touch to ask my permission to link to my blog in the invites to his annual birthday party fund- and consciousness-raising event, which takes place on May 20th.

On Thursday, May 20th, I’m hosting my annual Birthday Celebration.The party is in its third year and is a Birthday Celebration for yours truly, which doubles as an appreciation party for all my supporters who have donated cash, time, or talent to my numerous extra curricular activates as an activist and as a fundraiser.

This year’s event is tackling sexual stigma and prejudice, homophobia, sex workers rights, and protesting the criminalization of HIV transmission. It will feature the photography of Pat Croteau, who will be showcasing nudes of local community members to raise funds for P.O.W.E.R. – Prostitutes of Ottawa/Gatineau Work, Educate and Resist. (tinyurl.com/POWERottawa).

He added in his email last Friday, informing me of his friend’s arrest

I’m heart broken, and we here in Ottawa are rallying around him. Looks like my Birthday poster has taken on a whole new sense of urgency around here.

I fully support Michael’s efforts, and really feel for the entire HIV community in Canada. These are terrible times.

Texas: Another ‘deadly weapon’ HIV exposure conviction: 15 years for one-off sexual encounter

A 26 year-old man from the small Texan town of Copperas Cove has been sentenced to 15 years in prison with an additional $3000 fine after pleading guilty to charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

The aggravated assault? Having one-time consensual unprotected sex with a 16 year-old male after the two met on Grindr.  The deadly weapon?  HIV, of course.

The details of the man’s arrest, including a link to a photocopy of the affadavit of charges, were first published last November on the website of a local TV news station

The victim learned through another “Grinder” user that [the man] claimed to be HIV-positive. Police say [he] admitted that he was HIV positive during an interview with investigators. According to the affidavit, [he] did not inform his victim that he was HIV-positive.

Yesterday the local TV news station reported on the 15 year sentence handed down by the 52nd District Court noting that the man had previously pleaded guilty as charged in June.

In March 2010, similar charges were laid against another HIV-positive man in another part of Texas for sex with a 15 year-old male under similar circumstances.  The rather balanced Houston Chronicle article reporting these charges also referred to this case and pitches prosecutor David Castillo against Catherine Hanssens, executive director of the New York-based Center for HIV Law and Policy.

Prosecutors in Gatesville are trying the same tactic after similar allegations against another man surfaced last year. Coryell County District Attorney David Castillo plans to prosecute [name of man] in May. [The man], 26, is accused of sexually assaulting a 16-year-old boy he met on the Internet last year. Castillo said he believes [the man] has HIV and plans to prosecute him, regardless of whether the boy contracted it. “You can fire a gun at someone and miss, and it’s still aggravated assault with a deadly weapon,” Castillo said.
The analogy is a poor one, said Catherine Hanssens, executive director of the New York-based Center for HIV Law and Policy, because it overestimates how easily HIV is spread and stigmatizes those with the virus. “HIV should not be an aggravating factor unless there’s some evidence that he intended to do some harm and did some harm,” Hanssens said. “Criminal law in every state is adequate to deal with it. But to treat it as evidence of guilt and a deadly weapon wasn’t appropriate in 1985, and it isn’t appropriate now.”
In more than 20 years of advocacy, Hanssens said she had seen dozens of charges involving defendants with HIV, some arising from charges involving biting and spitting. Hanssens said charges alleging a “deadly weapon” arise from an infected person’s knowledge that they have the virus. She blasted prosecutors and public officials for not considering the deeper ramifications of calling HIV a deadly weapon.
“To refer to HIV as a deadly weapon in 2010 speaks of just unforgivable ignorance,” Hanssens said.
Contrast Ms Hanssen’s point of view with a blog posting by Houston criminal defence lawyer John Floyd, who discusses both cases and opinions in the above article, in a post entitled, Is HIV a Deadly Weapon?

HIV infected individuals who knowing have unprotected sex with sex partners without informing them of their infection are potential “serial killers.” It is impossible for the infected individual to know who or how many of their sex partners will contract HIV and die as a result of the exposure. No one should be exposed to such potentially fatal risks simply because someone is not responsible enough to fully disclose that he/she has a potentially contagious disease.

With defence lawyers like him, who needs prosecutors?
  
Of note, the age of consent in Texas is 17, and yet charges of “statutory rape” were not laid, even though the same outcome could have been obtained (Sex with a minor is a second degree felony, punishable by two to twenty years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.00) without these ridiculous and stigmatising ‘deadly weapon’ charges. 

Last November in Michigan – a state not known for its enlightened treatment of people with HIV given the (now dropped) terrorism charges against an HIV-positive man who allegedly bit a neighbour in self-defence – a 21-year-old man who pleaded guilty under the state’s HIV disclosure law to having unprotected sex during a one-night stand with a 16 year-old girl without first disclosing that he was HIV-positive was  jailed for nine months. The age of consent in Michigan is 16, so this was not statutory rape.

UK: New Guidance for Police Investigating Criminal Transmission of HIV

I’m reproducing below a press release issued yesterday by the National AIDS Trust (NAT) about the new UK (with the exception of Scotland) guidance for police officers investigating allegations of criminal HIV transmission. We’ll hear more about the guidance – a world’s first – and how it was developed, at the International AIDS Conference in Vienna which begins on Sunday.

Police and HIV sector work together to produce guidance

New guidance has been produced to help police when investigating allegations of criminal transmission of HIV. The guidance provides police officers with basic facts about HIV and sets out advice on how to deal with complaints about reckless (or intentional) transmission of HIV in a fair and sensitive manner.

The new guidance from the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) was developed by a working group which included police officers, representatives of the Crown Prosecution Service and the National Policing Improvement Agency, and the National AIDS Trust. Police across England, Wales and Northern Ireland will be expected to follow new guidance.

Ellie O’Connor, Detective Chief Inspector of the Metropolitan Police, comments;

“Investigations into the criminal transmission of HIV are extremely rare but we know they cause a lot of anxiety for the individuals involved. It is important police officers have an understanding HIV and what to do should someone make a complaint.

In producing this guidance we listened to the concerns of the HIV sector and worked in partnership with them. We strongly encourage all police forces to disseminate this guidance and ensure officers know to access it when a case occurs.”

Deborah Jack, Chief Executive of NAT, comments;

“Criminal investigations into HIV transmission worry many people with HIV, even though they occur only very occasionally. We are pleased that we have been able to work together with the police to produce guidance for their officers. The Association of Chief Police Officers took the issue very seriously.

The resulting guidance sets out a fair way to deal with these investigations that keeps in mind the particular sensitivities of HIV. This new guidance should serve to reduce the number of police investigations and reassure people living with HIV of what they can expect in the unlikely circumstance this occurs.”

For further information about this issue NAT and THT have produced a leaflet for people living with HIV – Prosecutions for HIV Transmission: A guide for people living with HIV in England and Wales.

Under the new guidance for police investigating criminal transmission of HIV, people living with HIV can expect:

  • to be treated supportively.
  • for their confidentially to be respected.
  • an investigation of reckless transmission only to be pursued if a complainant has been infected with HIV
  • for the case to be continually discussed with the Crown Prosecution Service to ensure only legitimate complaints are pursued.
  • contact with any other individuals relevant to the case to be initiated by trained staff at GUM clinics.
  • and uninterrupted access to medication in the event of being taken into custody.

If someone reports to police concerned that they have been exposed to HIV in the past 72 hours they will be referred to an open sexual health clinic or the nearest hospital Accident and Emergency Department to ask for PEP.

For a background study of early police investigations of alleged cases of HIV transmission see Policing Transmission by Terrence Higgins Trust.

Ireland: Police HIV risk “as likely as being struck by asteroid”; compensation slashed

The risk faced by Irish police of occupational exposure to HIV and other blood-borne infections is “as likely as being struck by an asteroid,” according to expert testimony during a test compensation case conducted by Ms Justice Mary Irvine in July 2009 following a high level of compensation claims involving fear of transmission of such diseases coming before the Irish courts.

Since then, reports today’s Irish Independent, compensation payouts have been reduced from “upwards of €50,000” to between €5000 and €7000.

Full story below.

Garda payouts for injury fears slashed due to ‘tiny’ HIV risk
By Ray Managh
Tuesday July 13 2010

COMPENSATION for gardai claiming they suffered anxiety after minor scrapes with potential drug addicts has been slashed after the risk of illness was deemed to be “as likely as being struck by an asteroid”.

After a test case was taken before the High Court, damages for stress were yesterday cut to well below what can be awarded by the District Court.

But while this will save the State in compensation costs, the final bill will more than quadruple after legal costs are included.

Asteroid

Some judges, have, in the past, awarded gardai in similar cases upwards of €50,000 at a time when no significant attempt had been made to test for HIV contamination.

Ms Justice Mary Irvine conducted a test case during which she heard from medical experts that the risk of a garda contracting diseases from drug addicts was as likely as being struck by an asteroid.

Since delivering her judgment, Ms Justice Irvine has significantly reduced that element of compensation relating strictly to anxiety about contracting an anti-social disease.

Yesterday, she reminded authorities of the need to allay garda fears through continued education about the remote risk of infection. She said in incidents of injury it was important to carry out tests on assailants.

Gda Cormac McAvock, of Oranhill, Oranmore, Galway, was awarded €7,000 for anxiety and physical injury he suffered while making an arrest when he was stationed in Mullingar.

He did not know what had caused a finger wound but had been advised to have blood tests. He did not have counselling and had not asked that his assailant be tested for HIV.

Gda Gerard Ryan, of The Grove, Louisa Valley, Leixlip, Co Kildare, was awarded €5,000 for stress suffered after he was injured during an arrest.

Ms Justice Irvine said he had believed he had been bitten by his assailant who was not a known drug user and he had been advised of the very minute risk of infection.

Angola: Police report two prosecutions in 2007/8

The first reported use of Angola’s 2004 HIV-specific law suggests at least two successful prosecutions in 2007/8.

The brief-but-stigmatising report by Angola Press is below. It should be noted that “intentional transmission” is very likely to simply mean there was non-disclosure of known HIV-positive status prior to unprotected sex. It is unclear why the police released these data now.

Two cases of intentional HIV/AIDS transmission were official recorded throughout 2007/2008 countrywide by the National Police, said a source from the corporation. The spokesman of the Police in Luanda, Jorge Bengue, gave the information, adding that despite this figure, there are many HIV positive people that practice such crimes.

“The national police know, in an informal way, that there are more crimes of this nature. What we have not are more cases officially notified, as there is protectionism from the society, so that the problem be solved among them”, he said.

The source said that the police got acquainted with these cases after various conflicts between couples.

Canada: Vancouver police hunt one man, add more charges to another

In Vancouver, two different men have been accused of not disclosing their HIV-positive status prior to sex with their female partners. Local media are having a field day.

The first, a Caucasian man in his late 20s, was arrested on May 19, according to a June 4th CBC News report following which North Vancouver police issued a press release that included the man’s name and photo which appeared in news reports throughout Canada.

“Police have what is called a duty to warn when it comes to things like this and that is one reason we put out a name and photograph so quickly,” [Const. Michael] McLaughlin told CBC News. “One of our primary responsibilities is keeping people safe, and enforcing the law goes along with that.”

The fishing expedition has now turned up four further women who also claimed the accused did not disclose before sex, according to June 30th CBC News report that continues to carry the man’s photo.

RCMP in North Vancouver are recommending four more charges of aggravated assault against [name of accused], who was first charged with the offence in May after police said he exposed his partner to the virus that causes AIDS without telling her. Since that charge was laid, four other women have come forward with enough evidence for investigators to recommend four more charges against [him], RCMP said in a release Wednesday.

The accused is out on bail “under court-imposed conditions that require him to tell any potential partners that he is HIV-positive.”

Vancouver’s tabloid, The Province, tells a rather different story – at least the headline appears to tell a different story.

Four more women say they were infected by HIV-positive man

Actually, no! They didn’t. The actual story in The Province is very similar to CBC News’ coverage – there is no mention of HIV-positive tests or accusations of infection.

The CBC and The Province coverage also includes the name (but not the photo) of a second man, a 38 year-old with an African name, from the Vancouver suburb of New Westminster. The man, who faces three counts of aggravated sexual assault for either not disclosing to one woman three times, or three women once, is presented by the police, and therefore the media, as a dangerous man on the loose.

CBC reports it this way

The offences date back to May of 2006 and there is a concern that [he] may have headed to Eastern Canada and will continue to have sex with women without telling them about his condition, police said.

The Province makes him seem much more like a calculated serial infector

New Westminster Mounties are hunting for 38-year-old [name of accused], who has been charged with three counts of aggravated sexual assault after having sex with three women while knowing he was HIV-positive. Crown counsel has issued a Canada-wide warrant for [his] arrest, as police believe he may have traveled to eastern Canada. The offenses he is charged with date back to May 2006, and police are concerned [he] may plan to put more women at risk.

These BC ‘name, shame and create fear’ cases are in direct contrast to the recent Vancouver court case where the accused was acquitted, and where the judge ordered a publication ban on the name of both the accuser and the accused.

They also contrast with a recent case in Edmonton, Alberta, analysed in an April 23rd Xtra.ca story, where a 50-year-old HIV-positive man was charged with aggravated sexual assault after allegedly failing to disclose his status to his female partner.

The piece quotes a police spokeswoman who explains that they did not release name or photo of the accused in order to protect the man’s partner.

“Releasing any details would without a doubt identify the victim. We are not releasing the name of the accused strictly to protect the identity of the victim. This is not a case of an unknown male with HIV forcing sex on women. The sexual intercourse in this case was consensual. However, the male failed to inform the woman that he was infected with HIV.”

In this case the accused man was released from custody with a trial set for March 2011.

UK: HIV transmission case dropped against gay Doncaster man

A case against a gay man in Doncaster, in the north of England, who was accused of ‘recklessly’ transmitting HIV to two male complainants, has been dropped due to lack of evidence – apparently there had been no investigation of the previous sexual partners of the complainants who may have infected them.

I don’t have a lot of details about the case, which I first heard about in March 2009, and I would like to protect the identity of the accused who has obviously been through hell for at least 15 months.

What I do know is this: two men had complained to the police that they believed that they had been infected by the accused during separate dates. (I don’t know whether the complainants knew about each other before they went to the police, or after).

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) took their complainants seriously enough to prepare a ‘reckless grievous bodily harm’ prosecution under Section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. To prove the element of causation of such ‘grievious bodily harm’ (i.e. HIV transmission), the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that only the accused could have infected the complainant(s).

I’m reliably informed by the man’s defence lawyer, Khurram Arif, that the trial was meant to commence yesterday at Doncaster Crown Court. The defence had prepared a scientific report examining the likelihood that only the accused could have infected both complainants. The report highlighted that the complainants’ previous sexual partners may also have infected them and that phylogenetic analysis could not rule this out.

Yesterday, the prosecution consulted with its own scientific expert and conceded that since both complainants had previous sexual partners and the police did not investigate nor eliminate them as possible sources of infection, there was no case to answer. This is, in fact, what the CPS guidelines state.

This is one of several cases defended by Mr Arif, where a lack of attention to the detail of what scientific evidence can – and cannot – prove has led to the CPS dropping cases very late in the day. As Mr Arif notes in his email to me: “The prosecution, when making such allegations, have to prove that they have closed all the doors to the possible sources of infection. Again, in this case, they did not.”

The case highlights that in England & Wales, people accused of such ‘crimes’ should never plead guilty and should immediately contact an HIV organisation for advice in order to be put in touch with an expert defence lawywer, such as Mr Arif, who services legal aid clients through Christian Khan Solicitors and private clients through GSC Solicitors.

In addition, complainants need to be aware that making such accusations requires them to reveal their entire previous sexual history and to name all of their sexual partners since their last HIV-negative test. Only when they have all been contacted and tested for HIV can a prosecution actually reach trial.