HIV carrier convicted in landmark ruling (UK)

[Pert_UK]

"In a landmark ruling, an HIV carrier was today found guilty of causing "biological" grievous bodily harm after he infected two lovers with the Aids virus.

Mohammed Dica, 38, conned his first victim into having unprotected sex by claiming he had had a vasectomy, and then persuaded a mother-of-two to sleep with him by declaring his love for her.

Dica's conviction is the first successful prosecution in England and Wales for sexually transmitting Aids, and the first for 137 years for infecting someone else with a sexually transmitted disease...

The judge...rejected a defence request for a psychiatric report. But he promised that if the pre-sentence report threw up any concerns then he would further adjourn sentencing for one to be prepared."

Full article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/aids/story/0,7369,1062772,00.html

2 things:

1 - this guy is scum and I hope he gets locked away for a long, long time. Not because HIV / AIDS is something that merits "special" treatment, but because this is somebody deliberately causing the lingering death of other people, and sentencing should be the SAME as if he'd done it in any other way.

2 - use protection!!!

[joeybee12]

1. I assume this guy knew he was positive

If he didn't, how could they prosecute?

[Superfly]

2. Ignorance is not a defense...

I swear I didn't know murder was illegal, officer!

[joeybee12]

3. But if he didn't know, all he knew was that he was having sex

If he didn't know, it wasn't deliberate.

[Superfly]

4. If I didn't know the speed limit was 65mph,

I would think I was just driving fast.

Breaking the law is breaking the law. I'm just trying to point out that not knowing something is not a defense when charged with a crime.

[evildoer]

5. but he did know

<-- from article:
The father of three from Mitcham, Surrey, did not give evidence, but when interviewed he told police both women had known of his condition before going to bed with him.
-->

The question is weather he is telling the truth that the women knew or not.

[Pert_UK]

6. According to the victim he passed it on deliberately....

didn't just have unprotected sex whilst aware he was HIV+.

I believe that he would have to have been aware that his actions constituted a significant risk to his partners, otherwise it wouldn't have been assault.

P.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

7. We had a case like this in New Zealand a few years ago.

Except in our case there were 5 women who became infected, and 6 others who were exposed but did not become infected.

The guy had known he was positive and I believe he not only knew he was infected but was intentionally trying to infect as many women as possible. He wasn't just taking risks, but actually wanted them to get AIDS because he had caught it off another woman.

I believe he ended up with a life sentence (which in NZ means 20 years, eligible for parole in ten).