Man Accused of Not Disclosing HIV Before Having Sex
This is pretty sick.
An 18-year-old man accused of having unprotected sex with another teen without telling her that he is infected with HIV was charged Tuesday with second-degree recklessly endangering safety, a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
According to a complaint, Rick Allen Brown had unprotected intercourse with an 18-year-old woman three times. Brown was living in South Milwaukee with his aunt at the time.
Brown’s aunt told the girl she believed Brown was HIV positive, and the girl went to South Milwaukee police.
The girl told police she would not have had sex with Brown if she knew about his medical condition.
First AIDS it is highly unlikely that AIDS can be transmitted sexually. Controlled tests have shown otherwise.
Second there is no proof that HIV causes AIDS, in fact even in an AIDS patient dying of AIDS is only loosing 1 in 500 T cells to HIV. HIV is more than likely a harmless passenger virus.
I have other views on what causes AIDS, but I’m probably already going to be flamed, so I will hold off on that for now.
Posted by Sandi on April 23, 2008 at 0823 hrs
Boy, ignorance is bliss. Both from the girl who had unprotected sex and certainly from Sandi. Tell you what Sandi, let’s expirement with you. If it is harmless, why don’t you get infected with it and see what happens.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 0832 hrs
Rick Allen Brown can’t hold a candle to this guy:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1073965.ece
I suspect hoax.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 0915 hrs
second-degree recklessly endangering safety, a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
People don’t die from HIV anymore… With proper medication they live relatively normal don’t they? So how do you prove recklessly endangering safety?
Also, isn’t there ‘assumed risk’?
Sorry, but I just have NO… LESS THAN NO sympathy for a girl that fucks some dude that she obviously doesn’t know well enough to know he’s got HIV and did so without a condom.
Dumb bitch. Dumb cause she had sex with someone without being willing to live with the consequences, Bitch cause she runs to the police afterwards.
The girl told police she would not have had sex with Brown if she knew about his medical condition.
Where do you draw the line?
If a girl tells me she’s on the pill and she’s not do I get to run to the police? Do I get legal recourse? Hell no, a judge will tell me I knew the potential risks, and it doesn’t matter, i’m gonna be stuck with child support.
This whole story is pathetic.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 0954 hrs
I agree 100% with xxpilot. In fact I was going to comment on a girl who informed me one time that she was on the pill but was not but xx beat me to it. Still, in the ensuing scare I was pretty terrified, let me tell you. She turned out to not really be pregnant but the point is that it was MY fault for believing her and assuming the risk.
You or your kids may treat sex with another human as just something to do to kill time or boredom; but the fact is taking your clothes off and hopping into bed with someone is one of the most momentous, significant, rewarding AND RISKY things you will ever do. The results or repercussions are usually permanent and far-reaching.
This guy may be a jerk, but the girl is not some innocent victim here.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 1028 hrs
In fact I was going to comment on a girl who informed me one time that she was on the pill but was not but xx beat me to it. Still, in the ensuing scare I was pretty terrified, let me tell you. She turned out to not really be pregnant but the point is that it was MY fault for believing her and assuming the risk.
I don’t know if it would be appropriate to tell my story on the internet, but trust me when I tell you I know exactly what you mean about terrified… times 10.
but the fact is taking your clothes off and hopping into bed with someone is one of the most momentous, significant, rewarding AND RISKY things you will ever do. The results or repercussions are usually permanent and far-reaching.
Yeah, I’m not here to claim sainthood and say that people should or shouldn’t be having sex. I mean do what you want, but you BETTER be ready to suffer the consequences. As for STD’s males and females bear the same risks and subsequent consequences of their actions.
When it comes to pregnancy, the consequences and choices are not so evenly distrubuted…..
I just think its a real real slippery slope charging this guy with a crime.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 1058 hrs
I’ve been in the same situation with a woman who lied, so I understand the feeling. It’s a good point. But I still gotta say BULLSHIT, what are you thinking? I’d charge him with the harshest thing I could then quickly get a law on the books that is more specific and up the penelties. If your body becomes a biological weapon and you knowing expose people to it without warning them just to get your rocks off you should have your penis removed or be put down. I think it’s WAY worse then deliberatly injecting someone with a like substance just to get them sick or worse.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 1358 hrs
XX makes a really good point. In principal I partially agree with him.
To me it is pretty obvious that you cross the line of criminality when you don’t disclose that you have a life threatening communicable disease. It becomes criminal when public safety is jeopardized.
I don’t know why you stopped yourself Sandi. If you believe that AIDS is caused by something other than HIV make your case. A belief that is not worth defending is not worth having.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 1451 hrs
To me it is pretty obvious that you cross the line of criminality when you don’t disclose that you have a life threatening communicable disease.
Is HIV life threatening? I don’t think so anymore.
People die from the flu, do you have an obligation to inform an elderly person you have the flu if you pass them in the grocery store?
I’d charge him with the harshest thing I could then quickly get a law on the books that is more specific and up the penelties. If your body becomes a biological weapon and you knowing expose people to it without warning them just to get your rocks off you should have your penis removed or be put down.
Morally I agree with you. People have an obligation to do the right thing.
Legally, I think its assumed risk. You have sex, you know the consequences, you play the game.
I would be willing to embrace the girl filing a civil suit against the guy, but not to have the government involved in a criminal penalty. You know the risks.
I always ask myself, “Do we NEED a law to protect people” or is there an opportunity for people to protect themselves.
If there is an opportunity for people to protect themselves, I always shy away from the legislative orgasm of writing a new law. I know its fun, and legislators thinks its a gold medal to have their name on a bill that passes,
But in this case. You can prevent yourself from EVER contracting HIV by not sleeping with someone you don’t trust.
Furthermore, you can almost certainly protect yourself from HIV by wearing a damn condom.
Lets not write a new law, that is going to be stretched and leveraged by who knows who and who knows how with unintended consequences.
Cause if HIV isn’t life threatening with medication, but we pass a law… What else is that going to set precedent for?
I suspect more people die from the flu every year than HIV in America. Shall we require disclosure of having the flu before you go to a grocery store? Or a nursing home? Do we want to walk down this road?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 1512 hrs
All this girl had to do to protect herself from HIV was keep her legs closed.
She couldn’t do that…
So if she can’t do that, all she had to do was use a damn condom.
She didn’t do that either…
And because she chose not to do either we need a law??? Seriously…. Nanny legislation at its worst.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on April 23, 2008 at 1515 hrs
Tell you what Sandi, let’s expirement with you. If it is harmless, why don’t you get infected with it and see what happens.
A clean HIV infection with no other contaminant. Sure, you could inject me with it. HIV does not cause AIDS or any other illness.
People don’t die from HIV anymore… With proper medication they live relatively normal don’t they? So how do you prove recklessly endangering safety?
Close. With a change in lifestyle and healthy living they survive. If they take the toxic anti-AIDS drugs it is a death sentence. There is a stronger correlation between drug use, inhalant or IV, and AIDS than there is HIV and AIDS.
In the early 80s it was announced that the cause of AIDS was found, and that a cure would be forthcoming in a couple of years. That was the end of rational research. Politics and fund raising entered the mix. All eggs were put in the HIV=AIDS basket and no other research was sanctioned or acceptable. Any researcher dissenting was barred from receiving grants, and their reputation viciously attacked.
But if HIV really causes AIDS, why is there so many people with AIDS who have no HIV virus?
Yesterday (Wednesday) was Rethinking AIDS day.
Posted by Sandi on April 24, 2008 at 0024 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 107
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 06:12 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).