That reality Asterz, personally if I was infected, why should I still have my teengs if I gern Fox Hell. I would not have a problem with it being cut off because I should have thought of that (If I raped someone in which I will never do), I should have thought about the consequences before I acted and now I have to pay the price.
Ya cyant be soft wit dese criminals when it comes to innocent peoples lives and put victims first, not criminals.....

In this country looks like the criminals get better treatment than the victim.

It shall be a sufficient defence to any charge under subsection (2), if it is made to appear to the court before which the charge shall be brought that the person with whom the person so charged had sexual intercourse knew, or had reasonable cause to believe, before sexual connection was occasioned, that the person so charged was so infected.

even with a first year law student as their lawyer...someone can easily get off because of the above...

In this country looks like the criminals get better treatment than the victim.


WELL THERE IS ANOTHER THREAD ON STABBING SOMEONE AND DEN YA GA GET BAIL LIKE NUTTIN AND BELIEVE ME, DAS A SERIOUS THREAD, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO HIV/AIDS, THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE WHO INTENTIONALLY SPREAD IT TO INNOCENT VICTIMS, OFF COURSE ONE SHOULD KEEP YA DRAWS/PANTIES UP UNTIL YA SERIOUS WIT DAT PERSON BUT SUPPOSED SOMEONE IS RAPED OR SHARING NEEDLES, THERE ARE MANY INNOCENT FAITHFULL VICTIMS WHO MAY ALSO HAVE CAUGHT IT FROM THEIR LOVED ONES AND THEIR LIVES ARE RUINED. THERE WAS AN EMAIL, I DONT KNOW IF IT WAS TRUE ABOUT A FEMALE WHO WENT TO MOI UNIVERSITY IN KENYA AND BECAUSE SHE GOT IT FROM ANOTHER MALE STUDENT, SHE GAVE IT TO I THEENK 108 MEN AND SHE STATED THAT ONLY 5 OR 6 USED A CONDOM. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY DESERVED IT OR NOT, THEY MAY HAVE GIVEN THE DISEASE TO THEIR FAITHFULL LOVED ONES BACK HOME. I GA TRY FIND IT AND POST IT FOR YOU, VERY SERIOUS EMAIL....

WELL THERE IS ANOTHER THREAD ON STABBING SOMEONE AND DEN YA GA GET BAIL LIKE NUTTIN AND BELIEVE ME, DAS A SERIOUS THREAD, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO HIV/AIDS, THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE WHO INTENTIONALLY SPREAD IT TO INNOCENT VICTIMS, OFF COURSE ONE SHOULD KEEP YA DRAWS/PANTIES UP UNTIL YA SERIOUS WIT DAT PERSON BUT SUPPOSED SOMEONE IS RAPED OR SHARING NEEDLES, THERE ARE MANY INNOCENT FAITHFULL VICTIMS WHO MAY ALSO HAVE CAUGHT IT FROM THEIR LOVED ONES AND THEIR LIVES ARE RUINED. THERE WAS AN EMAIL, I DONT KNOW IF IT WAS TRUE ABOUT A FEMALE WHO WENT TO MOI UNIVERSITY IN KENYA AND BECAUSE SHE GOT IT FROM ANOTHER MALE STUDENT, SHE GAVE IT TO I THEENK 108 MEN AND SHE STATED THAT ONLY 5 OR 6 USED A CONDOM. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY DESERVED IT OR NOT, THEY MAY HAVE GIVEN THE DISEASE TO THEIR FAITHFULL LOVED ONES BACK HOME. I GA TRY FIND IT AND POST IT FOR YOU, VERY SERIOUS EMAIL....


All i know is let someone gee it to me intentionally n i find out, bail wouldn't be an issue :hammer::hammer::bouncy::bouncy::bouncy::bouncy:

WELL THERE IS ANOTHER THREAD ON STABBING SOMEONE AND DEN YA GA GET BAIL LIKE NUTTIN AND BELIEVE ME, DAS A SERIOUS THREAD, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO HIV/AIDS, THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE WHO INTENTIONALLY SPREAD IT TO INNOCENT VICTIMS, OFF COURSE ONE SHOULD KEEP YA DRAWS/PANTIES UP UNTIL YA SERIOUS WIT DAT PERSON BUT SUPPOSED SOMEONE IS RAPED OR SHARING NEEDLES, THERE ARE MANY INNOCENT FAITHFULL VICTIMS WHO MAY ALSO HAVE CAUGHT IT FROM THEIR LOVED ONES AND THEIR LIVES ARE RUINED. THERE WAS AN EMAIL, I DONT KNOW IF IT WAS TRUE ABOUT A FEMALE WHO WENT TO MOI UNIVERSITY IN KENYA AND BECAUSE SHE GOT IT FROM ANOTHER MALE STUDENT, SHE GAVE IT TO I THEENK 108 MEN AND SHE STATED THAT ONLY 5 OR 6 USED A CONDOM. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY DESERVED IT OR NOT, THEY MAY HAVE GIVEN THE DISEASE TO THEIR FAITHFULL LOVED ONES BACK HOME. I GA TRY FIND IT AND POST IT FOR YOU, VERY SERIOUS EMAIL....

There was one circulating here about a man who was sleeping around wit different women and had AIDS. I woulda kill him.

It shall be a sufficient defence to any charge under subsection (2), if it is made to appear to the court before which the charge shall be brought that the person with whom the person so charged had sexual intercourse knew, or had reasonable cause to believe, before sexual connection was occasioned, that the person so charged was so infected.
even with a first year law student as their lawyer...someone can easily get off because of the above...


VERY TRUE ADDIDAS, I GUESS LIKE I SAID BEFORE, WHEN FACED WITH JAIL TIME/NO MORE FREEDOM TO ROAM, ONE WOULD AUTOMATICALLY SAY THEY DID NOT KNOW AND THE TRUE SCARY THING IS, ONE MAY HAVE A BETTER CHANCE BEING SENTENCED IN THE U.S. BECAUSE OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMMUNICATION WHEN IT COMES TO PROVING THAT THE PERSON IS AWARE THEY ARE INFECTED BY MEDICAL OFFICIALS RATHER THAN HERE IN THE BAHAMAS BECAUSE I DONT THINK ITS AS EASY AS THAT TO GET DOCTORS OR MEDICAL RECORDS TO INDICATE THAT ONE IS AWARE THAT THEY ARE INFECTED OTHER THAN IF THE PERSON HAS A CHILD, RENEWS THEIR INSURANCE, DONATES BLOOD ETC.

BOTTOM LINE IS TO NOT HAVE SEX WITH ANYBODY UNLESS BOTH PARTIES ARE TESTED WHICH UNFORTUNATELY IS STILL ONLY 99% SAFE BECAUSE THE VIRUS CAN SHOW UP A YEAR LATER OR AFTER THE PERSON WAS INFECTED BY SALIVA/BLOOD TEST.

GET TESTED PEOPLE

VERY TRUE ADDIDAS, I GUESS LIKE I SAID BEFORE, WHEN FACED WITH JAIL TIME/NO MORE FREEDOM TO ROAM, ONE WOULD AUTOMATICALLY SAY THEY DID NOT KNOW AND THE TRUE SCARY THING IS, ONE MAY HAVE A BETTER CHANCE BEING SENTENCED IN THE U.S. BECAUSE OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMMUNICATION WHEN IT COMES TO PROVING THAT THE PERSON IS AWARE THEY ARE INFECTED BY MEDICAL OFFICIALS RATHER THAN HERE IN THE BAHAMAS BECAUSE I DONT THINK ITS AS EASY AS THAT TO GET DOCTORS OR MEDICAL RECORDS TO INDICATE THAT ONE IS AWARE THAT THEY ARE INFECTED OTHER THAN IF THE PERSON HAS A CHILD, RENEWS THEIR INSURANCE, DONATES BLOOD ETC.
BOTTOM LINE IS TO NOT HAVE SEX WITH ANYBODY UNLESS BOTH PARTIES ARE TESTED WHICH UNFORTUNATELY IS STILL ONLY 99% SAFE BECAUSE THE VIRUS CAN SHOW UP A YEAR LATER OR AFTER THE PERSON WAS INFECTED BY SALIVA/BLOOD TEST.
GET TESTED PEOPLE

sound like i need to be celebate then. das da safest thing

I created the Ruined Lives thread instead FYI!!!!!

VERY TRUE ADDIDAS, I GUESS LIKE I SAID BEFORE, WHEN FACED WITH JAIL TIME/NO MORE FREEDOM TO ROAM, ONE WOULD AUTOMATICALLY SAY THEY DID NOT KNOW AND THE TRUE SCARY THING IS, ONE MAY HAVE A BETTER CHANCE BEING SENTENCED IN THE U.S. BECAUSE OF TECHNOLOGY AND COMMUNICATION WHEN IT COMES TO PROVING THAT THE PERSON IS AWARE THEY ARE INFECTED BY MEDICAL OFFICIALS RATHER THAN HERE IN THE BAHAMAS BECAUSE I DONT THINK ITS AS EASY AS THAT TO GET DOCTORS OR MEDICAL RECORDS TO INDICATE THAT ONE IS AWARE THAT THEY ARE INFECTED OTHER THAN IF THE PERSON HAS A CHILD, RENEWS THEIR INSURANCE, DONATES BLOOD ETC.
BOTTOM LINE IS TO NOT HAVE SEX WITH ANYBODY UNLESS BOTH PARTIES ARE TESTED WHICH UNFORTUNATELY IS STILL ONLY 99% SAFE BECAUSE THE VIRUS CAN SHOW UP A YEAR LATER OR AFTER THE PERSON WAS INFECTED BY SALIVA/BLOOD TEST.
GET TESTED PEOPLE

You're not getting it... it has very little to do with technology or whether one is the "US" or not.. It is in the way the law is written...

The oness isn't on the person to prove that they didn't know they were infectected... it is on... the person who theyhad sex with to prove they didn't know or didn't have "reasonable cause" to know...

when faced with prison sentences the accused with naturally say either:


They werent the only person they were sleeping with so perhaps they did not even infect them.


OR


They told them that they were infected before they had sex...

One person's word against another isn't an easy court battle..

sound like i need to be celebate then. das da safest thing


No man, ya still could do ya teeng, dont let that scare you from enjoying life and your relationship with you spouse, just be faithfull and get tested before ya do da do and if da person freakin out bout gettin tested wit you, roll dem out, ya health is ya wealth asterz, dont let anything stop you from living ya life, just be as responsible as possible....

It shall be a sufficient defence to any charge under subsection (2), if it is made to appear to the court before which the charge shall be brought that the person with whom the person so charged had sexual intercourse knew, or had reasonable cause to believe, before sexual connection was occasioned, that the person so charged was so infected.
even with a first year law student as their lawyer...someone can easily get off because of the above...

You can prove that the victim knowingly and willfully slept with an infected person?? I sincerely doubt that.

You're not getting it... it has very little to do with technology or whether one is the "US" or not.. It is in the way the law is written...
The oness isn't on the person to prove that they didn't know they were infectected... it is on... the person who theyhad sex with to prove they didn't know or didn't have "reasonable cause" to know...
when faced with prison sentences the accused with naturally say either:

They werent the only person they were sleeping with so perhaps they did not even infect them.

OR

They told them that they were infected before they had sex...

One person's word against another isn't an easy court battle..

1. Is the crime "infecting" the person or is the crime not telling a person that you sleep with that you are infected. I think the crime will be decided based on intention. This appears to be a crime of intent. And if you intentionally slept with a person, intentionally not told them, and intentionally attempted to infect them - it doesn't matter who else they slept with.

2. That would be extremely hard to prove. There is little evidence and, if there is, the support would not be substantial.

You can prove that the victim knowingly and willfully slept with an infected person?? I sincerely doubt that.
Thats not what I was saying...

1. Is the crime "infecting" the person or is the crime not telling a person that you sleep with that you are infected. I think the crime will be decided based on intention. This appears to be a crime of intent. And if you intentionally slept with a person, intentionally not told them, and intentionally attempted to infect them - it doesn't matter who else they slept with.
2. That would be extremely hard to prove. There is little evidence and, if there is, the support would not be substantial.
1. so that means a person can face charges EVEN IF the person they slept with was not infected? (Bearing in mind that it is proven that it was their intent to infect them?) (Also bearing in mind that we are discussing this law in the parameters of how it is written in Bahamian Law... not what we wish or think it should be)..

2. without evidence to support the contrary isn't the case at the stand still?... (i'm no law expert... just trying to see things rationally here)... but here's the scenario...

I told you I was infected you agreed to still have sex with me provided that we wear protection... You were convinced that protection would "protect" you from being infected... YOU WERE WRONG.. Your natural reaction was anger and that anger is now directed at me...

And also the "intent" (as you put it) wasn't to infect the partner by virtue of fact that they used protection each time they had sex...

Another thing is the law is ambiguous because "reasonable cause" for suspecting that someone is infected can be interpreted too broadly...IMO..

I have no problem with the law and I advocate that it excercized with impunity... but the wording of the law to me is very vague...

You're not getting it... it has very little to do with technology or whether one is the "US" or not.. It is in the way the law is written...
The oness isn't on the person to prove that they didn't know they were infectected... it is on... the person who theyhad sex with to prove they didn't know or didn't have "reasonable cause" to know...
when faced with prison sentences the accused with naturally say either:

They werent the only person they were sleeping with so perhaps they did not even infect them.

OR

They told them that they were infected before they had sex...

One person's word against another isn't an easy court battle..


I gatcha now, In my opinion, i think the crime is to not let the person know (whom the infected person is going to sleep with) that they are infected and as long as the person who is infected can prove that they were never told, the carrier may face jail time but its so tricky because unless a doctor/medical practioner comes forward and testifies against the carrier and proves that the carrier was told or was aware that they were infected, dats a serious case of one word against the other. Maybe another option is to try ones best to find out if their are any other victims in the same boat but I guess the safest thing to do is to get tested first, why is it that people are so afraid to get tested, I dont get it, if your infected, the sooner you start your treatment, the better....