Donate SIGN UP

Answers

1 to 17 of 17rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No.
"before you are considered for release".
12 years is fine.

When you have sexual intercourse with someone with whom you do not have a previous relationship, it is down to you to protect yourself. You should not rely on the person you’re having sex with to a) be honest about their history and b) be honest about their HIUV status.

If someone wants to deliberately spread their HIV, they are only able to do so if they have accomplices. An accomplice in this instance would be anyone who doesn’t practice safe sex.
Even considering he tampered with the condoms, sp?
A friend of mine once had a close shave with this kind of thing when the guy he was having sex with tore off the condom at the last moment without him noticing - and he didn't realise until the moment of "release."

Fortunately he was not infected. But he was terrified.
Question Author
sp, he tampered with the contraceptives.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Nasty piece of work with control freak psychopathic tendencies. I'd like to see longer but it's not an excessively short sentence.
Not nearly enough imo.
it's a minimum, not a maximum
I didn’t know about tampered condoms - was that the case here?
No it is not the right sentence IMHO. It is tantamount to murder in my book so 5 years is probably more appropriate, less or nothing if female.
it's not tantamount to murder, ymb.HIV/Aids was seen as a death sentence in the 1980s; now it's mostly a chronic but manageable condition. This isn't to minimise what this man did, or to claim that nobody dies of it any more; but medicine has moved on a lot

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-conversation-us/how-hiv-became-a-treatabl_b_8698438.html
He successfully infected 5 people. That's a life sentence for them.

I know medicine has moved on and it's not the death sentence it once was but still....
I appreciate ymb was partly joking in his answer. But I think this is more like, say, GBH than murder - like being left with injuries for life, but not necessarily similar to being in jail for life.

But I'd have no problem if they kept him in a lot longer than the minimum 12 years, which after the Worboys case is what will probably happen. Given the sort of personality he has, it'll be a long time before it's safe to let him out, if ever. I think the OP misses this point.

1 to 17 of 17rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Is 12 Years Enough For This Savage?

Answer Question >>