|
Associated Press – May 15, 2008:
|
|
|
1
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
What? No death penalty?
You’re right, that is weird. Texas must be getting soft. Or the perp was white.
No mention of whether officer was infected or not. Shoddy reporting.
I think it can take up to a year for hiv status to be really confirmed. In the meantime, the sop should abstain from unprotected sex.
If it weren’t for “pc” aids infected folks would atleast be tatoo’ed on the forehead. The only other civilized thing to do is ship them off to a quaranteened island.
Instead==we “trust” them to act responsibly. Hope triumphs over experience.
#3
I found a better article, but still no details on if the officer was infected.
http://tinyurl.com/6eyxul
Does seem to point to the guy knowingly spitting at people trying to infect them though based on the article from the Dallas News.
[Please use TinyUrl.com for overly long URLs. – ed.]
Straight fromm the CDC:
“Contact with saliva, tears, or sweat has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV.”
http://tinyurl.com/2yc7uk
I’m willing to bet these jackasses love Bill Frist.
That man is a weapon. :))
# 6 Gamabunta said, on May 15th, 2008 at 3:57 am
Straight fromm the CDC:
“Contact with saliva, tears, or sweat has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV.”
That’s not the whole story though. Contact with saliva *alone* has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV, but trace amounts of blood in the saliva (say, you just flossed your teeth maybe a little too hard, or have an open abscess – which [surprise!] isn’t exactly rare in people with STDs due to their various immunological issues) *does* carry a risk of infection if the blood makes contact with tissues that could carry the HIV virus.
That being said, the amount of blood in spit would mean the chances are pretty well close to 0%. Not 0%, but not exactly something I’d regularly roll the dice on anyhow. (Then again, I’m not in the medical profession – but neither was the police officer.)
Can’t wait for the replies to my following statement (especially from bobbo and FTLO):
The police are wrong in this case (Yes I really said it guys). I’ve heard of laws and/or precedents where an HIV/AIDS infected person attacking a cop with a syringe or other blood-loaded device was tried as an attempted murderer would be. That makes more sense than this.
In the case of just being spit on (even in the eye), the chance of infection is so infinitesimally small that it shouldn’t be an issue. Should’ve just put the spit bag/guard over the perp and been done with it.
How many years for an HIV-negative spitter?
Are all cop spitters required to take an HIV test? What about cop scratchers? Sniffers and kickers?
Dunno, slippery slope.
[What about M&M tossers? – ed.]
I’m no bleeding-heart lefty, but the idea of getting spit at by an HIV-infected person scares the hell out of me. I’m very glad they nailed him.
The decision was based on the false claim that HIV is a threat. If the dude gets a good attorney, like the one who represented Audrey Serrano who won a 2.5 million judgment for being exposed to and physically assaulted by the rampant errors in HIV testing, his sentence would be reversed.
Thank god he didn’t light a cigarette and contribute to global warmimg.
[Duplicate comment deleted. – ed.]
#8 and #12
I can understand if the officer was infected with HIV, but if no infection took place then why was such a harsh sentence carried out?
Keep in mind this took place in May 2006. If HIV is now considered a deadly weapon you can be prosecuted for then what’s stopping an overzealous judge from taking the next step and sentencing HIV positive people on the street for carrying a concealed weapon?
In fact, why not test the whole prison population on a quarterly basis and remove those who are all HIV positive since they’re carrying a deadly weapon?
If you’re going to support this kind of sentencing then you have to support it across the board.
Geeze, the media sure has some of you fearing for your freakin’ useless lives!
YOU CAN’T GET AIDS FROM SPIT!
By its nature, it is a retrovirus, and has a very hard time surviving outside of the body, let alone in spit. There has never been a case of anyone getting AIDS from spit.
I guess some of you would have an AIDS ONLY water fountain if you worked with someone with AIDS.
Learn the facts, they can protect you from fear.
You can’t get AIDS (or the HIV virus) from spit. The judge might as well sentenced the guy to jail for giving the cop “cooties”. But Texas isn’t exactly the home of science based factual thought.
If saliva carried HIV, then nearly every person HIV positive people kissed (with tongue) would get HIV. People have studied and looked at this for years and years. There is 0% evidence for that. The HIV rate would be 100 times higher if it was that easy to pass. You pretty much have to stick a dirty needle in your arm or have unprotected sex.
The prison guards probably won’t like taking crap from him year after year.
condoms don’t stop aids that much.
#9–Well Michael, since you called me out==I’m on the fence. Elements of my thought process:
1. No one has a right to spit on other people–especially on cops.
2. When spitting, the crime of assault and battery has taken place. Spit alone==should be misdemeanor like disorderly conduct.
3. I did initially think spit from an aides patient would be infectious but remembered “the truth” when this thread reminded me there must be blood in the spit to be infectious and even then the tramsmission rate would be low.
4. So, the risk of infection is more than zero. Who should take on that risk? Who should suffer the penalty for creating that risk?
5. There should be “an enhancement” for any aides patient spitting on people. How much is debatable, but start with double the misdemeanor rate.
6. If the aids guy was actively bleeding in his mouth, then I would treat the spit as attempted murder with a deadly weapon.
I do recall a story about some perp who had been cut with a knife and he squirted is blood on the arresting officers. He was not charged with anything more at the time==years ago.
I don’t think it is correct to wait and see if the cop gets aids–all the elements of the crime are present at the time of the act. Maybe that calls for a special spitting law.
I don’t like cops. Necessary service but they have too much power and too little supervision by their departments or legal system==they all tend to support one another, the blue line. But I don’t like criminals even more. Then, theres my ex-wife. Everything is relative.
bobbo, “Then, there’s my ex-wife. Everything is relative”
That line made me laugh out loud – thanks for that!
As an HIV Pozitive male (recently diagnosed, late stage HIV)i’m a bit saddened that educated people who post here have such distasteful views of people living with HIV. Mine was due to teenage stupidity, but not everyone with the disease is guilty of promiscuous unprotected gay sex. or any fault of their own. HIV isn’t transmitted through saliva.
It can’t survive outside of a certain temperature range. So this is a retarded case. You don’t catch HIV from sharing a snack/drink with someone. I’ve been with my significant other for the entire time i’ve probably been infected, 10 years of sex, thinking we were both negative, and he has remained negative all this time.. so even having unprotected sex doesn’t automatically mean you will get infected.
Yes, I do think HIV positive people should have some indicator of their status that others can see for themselves. But not for the use of persecution, but rather for sexual partners to know for sure. Then again, there are sickos out there who WANT to be infected, which is totally beyond my understanding.
It’s a good thing he didn’t throw M&Ms at the cop. They shoulda tased him, bro! Send him to Gitmo!
[Duplicate comment deleted. – ed.]
Here are a few things you folks should know:
1)Willie Campbell had about 20 prior criminal convictions, including 2 separate trips to prison for reataliation against police officers.
2)The issue of deadly weapon in Texas only affects parole eligibility. It has nothing to do with the length of the sentence. Willie would have faced the same range of punishment whether or not the jury found that saliva infected with HIV was a deadly weapon.
3)A deadly weapon is anything that in its manner of use is CAPABLE of causing serious bodily injury or death. That doesn’t mean that it actually has to cause injury or death. I don’t think you would find a scientist or doctor in this country who would be willing to say that someone with HIV is not CAPABLE of transmitting HIV by spitting in another person’s mouth. Maybe it’s rare, maybe it’s 1 in a billion, but it’s possible. Possible = capable
Most of you guys are missing the point. The guy knew he had AIDS and spit in a cops face on purpose. He was trying to kill the cop. It’s very much like pointing a loaded gun at a cop, pulling the trigger and having the gun jam. Attempted murder.
Personally, I’m all for extremely severe punishment and / or physical harm to anyone who spits in anyones face (AIDS or not). The cop showed admirable restraint by not beating the guy into a fine red paste.
#26 “spit in a cops face on purpose.”
Actually, nowhere in the (albeit short) article does it state that. We can’t claim to know the guys intentions. He was drunk and being a d*ck – that’s all there is to it. Equating it to pointing a loaded gun at someone is just plain ridiculous.
Actually, Michael, the jury found the man guilty of INTENTIONALLY causing his saliva to contact the officer. Whether he was trying to infect the officer with HIV or just being a “d*ck” was not at issue. The crime was simply intentionally causing his saliva to contact the officer.
It seems rather obvious that a man with a voluminous criminal history which includes retaliation against police officers would receive a stiff sentence from the jury after once again committing a crime against an officer! (The jury assessed the man’s sentence, not the judge.)
This makes me think Texans are stupider than I thought before. You can get HIV through blood. You cannot get it through saliva. If someone drops HIV+ blood onto your skin, the chance that you’re going to get infected are so close to zero they’re considered statistically insignificant. You can also get it through semen, vaginal secretions, and breast milk. I repeat, no body has ever become infected with HIV through saliva – 41 million people are believed to be HIV positive, and it has NEVER happened. You’d have to drink (or inject) roughly 8 litres of saliva into you for this to even be a possibility. Just to clear this up, you also cannot get it from sitting on a toilet seat, or from someone coughing on you. You CAN get it from not wearing a condom while having sex with someone who is HIV positive, sharing a needle with someone who is HIV positive, or through birth (mother to child transmission). Educate yourselves instead of spreading fear and misinformation.
http://tinyurl.com/2yc7uk
The point here, I believe, is that the perp thought he was attempting murder, otherwise he wouldn’t bother to spit..it being at the very least an additional assault charge (and in normal circumstances being beaten into a red paste).
If the people here automatically assume spitting is contagious…do you really think he didn’t? A man so dumb he’s been caught like 20 previous times? Not to say a Rhodes scholar can’t be a criminal..I’d just expect him to be caught a little less frequently..^_^ As for the “he couldn’t have infected the officer” defense, it’s like saying..”Yeah, I thought the gun was loaded, but it wasn’t..so no harm, no foul, eh?” The cop still saw the gun pointed and heard the click of the hammer. I’m sure that at least for a little while some mental anguish was felt..^_^.
I’m not known for my love of police either, but in this case, I think this is about right. Violent recidivist with well more than 3 strikes, committing what he felt was deadly assault.