Oh ghod

Jul. 20th, 2005 03:17 pm
lovingboth: (Default)
[personal profile] lovingboth
There's been another conviction for HIV transmission, this time of a woman.

As ever, there is zero evidence that, despite the comment in the story, the infection was "deliberate".

I am more surprised that it's so hard to find the details. "A woman with HIV could infect you lads!" (my paraphrasing) was one of the HEA's more notorious ads, not least because the viewer was supposed to be horrified that she would look the same as she did now in several years time. Presumably, they'd be happier if she died quickly.

But on the BBC's website, it's not in the news page, not in health, not on the Wales page, but only on the SE Wales one. A bit of browsing reveals that it's copied from a Press Association story, not that the BBC acknowledge that...

(no subject)

Date: 2005-07-20 03:55 pm (UTC)
zotz: (Default)
From: [personal profile] zotz
'culpable and reckless conduct'

Yes, but if the effect is the same (in this sort of case, anyway) is it similarly controversial? If not, any idea why not?

Before the first case happened, the government were saying that reckless transmission shouldn't be an offence, FFS.

Didn't the Law Comission disagree, though?

Profile

lovingboth: (Default)
Ian

February 2026

S M T W T F S
1234567
8910 11121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags