OA_show('Wallpaper');
OA_show('Leaderboard - Xx90');
Choose your edition:

Search form

OA_show('Advertorial');

Supreme Court agrees to hear HIV-nondisclosure case

Blogs
Latest News Roundup

Supreme Court agrees to hear HIV-nondisclosure case

The Supreme Court of Canada announced May 5 that it will hear the case of an HIV-positive man who failed to disclose his status before having sex. The case, known as Mabior, will be the third such case to go to the Supreme Court, and the first in almost a decade.

Another case, R v DC in Quebec, is winding its way through the appeal process and could end up before the Supreme Court soon.

The court does not give reasons for agreeing to hear a case, but HIV activists believe that Mabior and DC will be a test of two defences against HIV-related charges: condom use and low viral load.

In interviews with Xtra in February, lawyer Glenn Betteridge and Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network's Cécile Kazatchkine described Supreme Court challenges as one of three prongs they're using to minimize the harm caused by unchecked prosecutions of poz folks for nondisclosure.

In the case headed to the Supremes, a Winnipeg man was sentenced to 14 years in jail for six counts of aggravated sexual assault. Four of those convictions were overturned on appeal. Because he is a new immigrant, when he is released, he will likely be deported.

The Supreme Court first ruled that knowingly exposing a sexual partner to HIV is a prosecutable crime in 1998's Cuerrier decision. It reinforced that decision in 2003's R v Williams.

But developments in treatment and advances in the science of HIV mean that new information will be presented to the court. Research released since Williams shows that those who are being treated and have an undetectable viral load pose little or no risk of infecting others, even when they have sex without a condom.

 

 


Bookmark and Share  
OA_show('Text Ad - #1');
OA_show('Text Ad - #2');

Comments

You have got to be kidding me
You have got to be kidding me?

There are Poz people that go around and lie to people because they like infecting them.

You must like the idea of 18yo bois getting infected because of some jerk.

What is wrong with you?

And yes I'm gay.
The article states that
The article states that "research released since Williams shows that those who are being treated and have an undetectable viral load pose little or no risk of infecting others, even when they have sex without a condom". Of course, the HIV/AIDS Legal Network ignores that fact that in the bareback fetish community, an HIV positive top will go off meds in order to increase their viral load when they want to deliberately poz somebody. A stealth pozzing occurs when a HIV positive top removes his condom during sex (without the bottom knowing) and then ejaculates inside the bottom.
In Canada, HIV, AIDS and gay
In Canada, HIV, AIDS and gay organizations don't want HIV positive people who infect HIV negative people to face any criminal or legal sanctions. They believe that an HIV negative person is soley responsible for protecting themselves from infection. Those same organizations vilify and condemn any person who complains to police about an HIV positive person who infected them. In other countries, it's the other way around. For example, New Zealand HIV, AIDS and gay organizations condemn the behavior of HIV positive people who deliberately spread the virus and express sympathy for the people they infect. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uZTJZoZ5BE&feature=related
Sign in or Register to post comments