Posted by: The Last Liberal Gwinnettian | May 30, 2009

Bodily Fluids as Deadly Weapons?

I was perturbed by this recent MSNBC headline: “Texan Gets 45 Years in Prison for Spreading HIV.”

At first, I thought perhaps the man had gone around injecting people with the virus. That would certainly be a horrendous crime, right?

But no. This man has received 45 years in prison for having unprotected sex. Apparently, bodily fluids can now be considered a deadly weapon.

The man, Phillipe Padieu, age 53, was described by his own attorney as a “modern day Casanova.” He infected six women with HIV by having unprotected sex with them. Prosecutors argued that Padieu’s bodily fluids were a deadly weapon because they contained HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. As a result, Padieu will be going away for assault with a deadly weapon.

I agree that people who purposely deceive their sexual partners regarding their sexual history and/or health are despicable and deserve some sort of punishment. But is it really the role of government to mete out such punishments? Since when is lying about sex against the law? Do we now have full disclosure requirements before engaging in one night stands?

More importantly, what about those six women that Mr. Padieu infected? Are they really “victims”? They made the conscious decision to have unprotected sex with a man. In today’s world, there is no excuse for engaging in unsafe sex. Unless you’ve been living under a rock for your entire life, there is virtually no chance that you are unaware of the risks of STDs, particularly HIV/AIDS. So use a condom, people!

Yes, accidents happen. Yes, condoms break. But what are the odds that SIX condoms broke with SIX different women? This guy would have to be the unluckiest guy in the world for that to happen. Which leads me to believe that the guy used his “Casanova” skills to persuade these women to forgo protection. That is reprehensible, to be sure. But is it assault?

Please don’t misunderstand me. I am in no way insensitive to the plight of those living with AIDS, and I am not trying to say that AIDS victims deserve to have such an awful disease.  What I am saying is that people who have unprotected sex, regardless of the circumstances, need to take responsibility for the consequences.

What this man did was wrong. But his sexual partners are not blameless, and they are certainly not victims of assault with a deadly weapon.

This decision sets a dangerous precedent. What the court has basically said is that anyone who knowingly transmits a deadly disease is guilty of assault with a deadly weapon, and that anyone who chooses to have unprotected sex and contracts a deadly disease as a result is blameless. Bad idea, guys.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: