HIV-Positive Man Sentenced to 35 Years for Spitting on Police Officer

That is ridiculous. It was probably cause he was black.

 

I thought you couldn't spread HIV through saliva.

 

I think it's theoretically possible.

 

That seems harsh but I don't know all the details of HIV...I thought you couldn't spread it with saliva but I don't know...

Sad thing is, he has a higher probability of spreading it when he's in prison...

 

Harassment of a public servant gets you 35 years?

 

Non-Infectious Fluids
Saliva—is NOT considered to be infectious. The only time saliva would pose a risk would be if it had blood present in it. There are no documented cases of HIV transmission through saliva. There is a protein in the mouth that attaches itself to the surface of blood cells and blocks infection by HIV that appears to be present in the mucous membrane in the mouth at a level sufficient enough to reduce the concentration of HIV in saliva to non-infectious levels.

Urine and Tears—are NOT considered infectious. While HIV has been found in urine and tears, it is not concentrated in an amount sufficient for transmission.

Sweat, Feces, Vomit—are NOT considered infectious. HIV has never been found in these materials. The only possible risk would be if there was blood present.

HIV Transmission Routes
HIV can enter the body through open cuts or sores and by directly infecting cells in the mucous membranes. Transmission can happen in the mouth, the eyes, vagina, penis (through the urethra), in the anus and rectum. HIV cannot cross healthy, unbroken skin.

http://www.mnaidsproject.org/learn/transmission.htm

 

I did too; I've always understood it would take mutiple "buckets" of spit to contract HIV. I really hope there was a physician, endemologist or 9th grade sex ed teacher at this trial or sentencing hearing to make sure the jury and judge understood that. Very difficult to assume this would have happened outside the South.

 

I have a feeling that at least the sentence will be appealed. He definitely appeared to have attacked a police officer. 35 years is a bit harsh for spitting.

 

But hey, if you're a cop you can shoot people 400 times and claim it was just an accident.

Or you can just lie about it.

 

this is just ridiculous i can see a harsher sentence if the cop contracted HIV because of the saliva but if he didnt than this is just totally out of whack imo. Its frustrates me to see the system punish people excessively for things like this. If this was Magic Johnson or another high profile person probably would not even see any jail time.

just pisses the hell out of me, i am not saying the defendant shouldnt have been punished he broke the law but 35 years? i could have sworn i have seen cases where rapists, murderers, major drug dealers get less jail time.



or is this just a case of dallas being dallas?

 

is the punishment of wanting to kill a man similar to actually killing a man?

how did they determine that he spit on him trying to infect him and not just being upset.

 

I hope not, or incarceration rate will go to about 99%.

 

Reminds me of people thinking Cruise was crazy becuase the reporter put the water in the Microphone . . ..

everyone was saying it was a harmless joke
but
the reality is that you don't know what's in the water
here
don't know the long term effects of the spit

If the police does not get HIV . . .then it is over kill
If the policeman got HIV then . . well it is not as bad a punishment
Killing by infection is the same as shooting someone

Rocket River

 

Dallas.

 

I don't see how that answers the argument most posters here have made, that HIV can't be transmitted through saliva.

 

Here's a couple of things you need to consider.

Harassment of a Public Servant is a Third Degree Felony which only carries a punishment range of 2-10 years. In order for the guy to get 35 years it means he must've been a true habitual - that means he had been to the pen at least twice before. That pushes his punishment ranger up to 25-life.

If you look at it with the minimun being 25 years, they only added 10 years to the minimum they could've given him.

Second, do you really think officers should be spit at? I mean if you have a problem with that being a felony - blame your legislature, not the jury. Moreover, in a lot of these cases the spit has blood in it, but hey even if it doesn't how many of you would be cool with being spit at by a guy with HIV...how many would be like, hey no big deal, HIV can't be transferred via saliva.

 

you can't really just appeal the sentence...doesn't really work like that. Moreover, appellate courts don't just reduce the sentence because it seems harsh...there has to be a legal basis for it