Main Forums > Living With HIV

Your views on taking the guy who gave you HIV to court?

<< < (2/8) > >>

Rob - Dublin:
Cliff, that is possibly the most relevant point of my deliberations on the whole matter. Even for Karl's case to succeed it WOULD be necessary for us to prove a genetic match. The London guy assuming he defended the case could ask his legal team to also request a genetic match to him in the hope that it would not. The problem this poses is that specialist genetic microbiologists and other medical professionals would have to prove this point and as i'm not a medical doctor or medical lawyer I would not know even if this point can be proved as replicating HIV in cells may become anonymous to genetic links every 24 hours if my information is correct.

On the point of juristiction for any possible case. Britain is the most like venue as the guy is resident there. He is presumable an Irish citizen and as my infection took place in the Irish juristiction it would be possible to have an Irish court accept juristiction. As any possible case would seek initialy to apportion responsibility to teh London guy, even if the case was to be heard in Ireland, the guy would be served court papers and it would be in his own interests to defend the case. If he did not choose to defend the case evidence presented by the plaintiff may be accepted and a declaration given in favour of Karl and his case. This would then allow a civil case take place.

If the declaration case was heard in Ireland followed by a civil case and an award was made against the London guy, Ireland could in exceptional circumstances issues warrants for the seisure of assets in the country of residence of the guy.


Rob

Rob - Dublin:
Cliff, that is possibly the most relevant point of my deliberations on the whole matter. Even for Karl's case to succeed it WOULD be necessary for us to prove a genetic match. The London guy assuming he defended the case could ask his legal team to also request a genetic match to him in the hope that it would not. The problem this poses is that specialist genetic microbiologists and other medical professionals would have to prove this point and as i'm not a medical doctor or medical lawyer I would not know even if this point can be proved as replicating HIV in cells may become anonymous to genetic links every 24 hours if my information is correct.

On the point of jurisdiction for any possible case. Britain is the most like venue as the guy is resident there. He is presumable an Irish citizen and as my infection took place in the Irish jurisdiction it would be possible to have an Irish court accept jurisdiction. As any possible case would seek initially to apportion responsibility to the London guy, even if the case was to be heard in Ireland, the guy would be served court papers and it would be in his own interests to defend the case. If he did not choose to defend the case evidence presented by the plaintiff may be accepted and a declaration given in favour of Karl and his case. This would then allow a civil case take place.

If the declaration case was heard in Ireland followed by a civil case and an award was made against the London guy, Ireland could in exceptional circumstances issues warrants for the seizure of assets in the country of residence of the guy.

Rob (Sorry, this one has the spell check WORKING)

water duck:
Rob,

If i would a judge, and have two parties before me, one party is lying, then it's the duty of the lawyers to prove that.
If both of you can proved beyond a shade of a doubt that it's this guy who give you both HIV, then you must not represent Karl; you must actually get someone else to represent the both of you. In court, the identity of the client can be kept a secret no ?? only know to the judge. You tell me, you are the lawyer.

DO WHAT YOUR HEART TELL YOU. One way or the other , the truth will always see the light of day.

Wishing you lots of good luck and courage !!

Siang

Christine:
Hello,

I read your post earlier, and have been thinking about it. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. Like Cliff stated, how do you know for 100% sure he is the one who infected both of you?
2. How can that infection be proved in court? Is it possible to trace the virus from person to person?
3. Again, like Cliff stated, are you willing to put your career, your personal sexual history out there for all the world to see. And in a case like this, EVERYTHING, perhaps things that are not even true would be brought forth.
4. In regards to risking your career, could you afford to loose your current job? Would you loose your health benefits? How would you handle medical & pharmacy bills?
5. How would your family do with a public court case?

Lastly, if he is the type of person who would knowingly infect others, would a court case change his future behaviors? Maybe, maybe not.

In my opinion, as a person who had unprotected sex also, everyone has a responsibility to protect themselves. Most adults understand that there are people in the world who lie, and some who are sadistic, and knowing this we should have made the choice to protect ourselves. Does that make what he did any less wrong? No. You and the other person should have been told the truth of his status, so you could make an informed consent or decline. But ultimately, condoms should have been used by all involved.

If he is intentionally spreading hiv, should he be held accountable? Absolutely, but how do you prove intent? What if he claims he told both of you he was +, and you both knew, and choose to have unprotected sex. If it comes down to your word against his, how do you legally prove who is telling the truth?

This is such a complicated issue. I would do a lot of personal soul searching, and also some legal research before I made any decisions.

Christine

alisenjafi:
I thought the offender had to knowingly give you an std to be prosecuted. Can you prove that? Also aren't you going to give the courts fodder for your own sexual habits.It has been mentioned before and many times, that it takes two to tango all parties need to be responsible and clearly you haven't.
Not to chastise you but when the crime de jour shifts from kiddy sex on the internet to this ,only lawyers will make out and will cause major havoc with all people infected. it also gives more ammo to those who think gays shouldn't be allowed to have sex in the first place.
It is one thing if you are in a monogamous relationship and your honey infects you and something else if you have the horn and don't let common sense rule.  Good luck on what ever you decide.
Johnny - who has no legal background

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version