HIV+ 25 Yr Sentenced for Sex without disclosure tossed out by Court
 |
| Nick Rhoades |
A Plainfield man sentenced to serve 25 years in prison after pleading guilty of criminal transmission of HIV will have that sentence tossed out, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday.
Nick Rhoades, 39, became an advocate to reform Iowa law after he pleaded guilty of criminal transmission of HIV following a 2008 arrest. Rhoades, who is HIV-positive, had protected sex with a man who did not know about Rhoades’ positive status; the man did not, however, contract HIV.
Advocates have argued that the law unjustly punished people, even for having safe sex. The court’s ruling — which rested heavily on newer understandings of the HIV virus — should send a message to other states with similar laws, Rhoades told The Des Moines Register.
“I’ve gone through a lot of suffering, my family’s gone through a lot of suffering, but I’d like to believe that my case is going to be a catalyst for change, and if that’s the case, everything I’ve gone through is so worth it,” he said.
Rhoades pleaded guilty and began serving the 25-year sentence before a district court judge released him and put him on a five-year probation.
In the majority opinion, Justice David Wiggins acknowledged several points that Rhoades’ defense attorneys argued made Rhoades’ guilty plea unjust. Rhoades’ attorneys argued that he had a low viral load — the amount of HIV in Rhoades’ blood — that greatly reduced the risk of transmission, even during an unprotected oral sex act that also happened.
Rhoades used a condom during sex, taking precautions to ensure the man wasn’t exposed to bodily fluids, his attorneys argued. In the ruling, Wiggins wrote that modern medical advances and treatment options for HIV-infected people should be considered in Rhoades’ case.
“Today we are unable to take judicial notice that an infected individual can transmit HIV when an infected person engages in protected anal sex with another person or unprotected oral sex, regardless of the infected person’s viral load,” Wiggins wrote. “The evidence ... shows there have been great strides in the treatment and the prevention of the spread of HIV.”
Rhoades’ sentence cannot be upheld under the HIV transmission law in place at the time of his arrest, Wiggins wrote.
The law specifically requires that a defendant “intentionally expose” a partner to the virus, he wrote.
The court’s ruling will send Rhoades’ case back to Black Hawk County District Court, where prosecutors could have another chance to claim Rhoades’ actions leading up to his arrest violated the law, the ruling said.
If prosecutors cannot show Rhoades committed a crime, a district court judge should allow his guilty plea to be withdrawn, the ruling said.
Though it does not completely resolve Rhoades’ case, his attorneys with Lambda Legal — a legal organization that advocates for gay and lesbian rights — celebrated the ruling.
“We applaud the court for applying the law in light of current medical understanding of how HIV is and is not transmitted,” said Christopher Clark, an attorney with Lambda Legal who argued the case in front of the court. “An individual who takes precautions to prevent transmission should not be considered a criminal for choosing to be sexually active, and we are very pleased that the court agrees.”
It is unfortunate that the court’s decision could now extend Rhoades’ time spent in court fighting the charge, he said. Rhoades’ probation ends in less than three months, but any outcome in the case will likely take longer, he said.
Rhoades, however, hopes that similar defendants in other states will be able to point to the court’s decision in fighting their own legal battles, he said.
Thirty-nine states have laws similar to the Iowa law that Rhoades’ was prosecuted under or have charged HIV-positive people under other statutes, according to information from Lambda Legal.
“I know that I can’t change the past, but I’d like to believe that maybe I’m changing the future,” Rhoades said. “My attorneys feel that this could be setting precedent not just in Iowa, but speaking to other states about how HIV is transmitted.”
Last month, Gov. Terry Branstad signed into law updated HIV transmission legislation. The new law takes the emphasis off of people specifically with HIV, focusing instead more generally on infectious diseases. It also creates a tiered system of sentencing.
Due to his case, Rhoades became a public face of the fight to update the law and his story was featured on national media outlets, including CNN and BuzzFeed.
Black Hawk County Attorney Tom Ferguson said Friday that his office will look at the ruling and then examine the evidence in the case to determine how to proceed.
“Obviously, the case just came out this morning,” he said. “We’ll obviously have to analyze the case and look how the court has interpreted what is required for that element, then we can take a look at the evidence and the investigation.”
However, with the strong message from the court that Rhoades’ conviction doesn’t match with medical understanding of HIV transmission, it would be a surprise for prosecutors to try again, Clark said. There’s likely little or no new information that could be used, he said.
“I can’t imagine that the state’s going to think it’s an effective use of resources to continue to pursue this,” he said.
A few words from the Publisher Adam Gonzalez
My ears continue to pick up the noise from mainly Republican straights and some gays in which they argue how can we let a man spreading a deadly disease be let loose to do it again. Meanwhile he should get the 25 yrs for doing this awful deed.
First the anti gay Republicans do not care how many other gays one HIV+ person might take with them. The only thing is, it does not work like that. They still want people to go to jail and pay a price for having sex. That is at the bottom for sex prosecutions. When they (straights) go to a prostitute and get infected they want everything to get quiet and nobody arresting no one. They don’t go back to the police station and file a report so the prostitute would be arrested. But for a gay person is different and is because HIV is perceived as a gay disease, so it’s always been open season to go after gays for any reason. If gays are criticized for breaking up marriages and not only that but the whole damn institution, then gays can be blamed for anything and they do blame us for even the storm and hurricanes. You might say who listens to that? I say if it’s in the news constantly they have listeners and blind repeaters of what they hear without having their minds turn on to what it means.
I have a question though: Whose responsibility is it not to become HIV when two adults agree to have sex even though they don’t know each other, in other words a hook up
I think both…who do you think? If the answer is both why are they punishing only one on the word of the other? and putting him in jail for a long time for
most of his life?
Keeping your health is your responsibility and if you are going to have sex with a guy as a trick and you aren’t using protection that is your choice. It takes more than just having sex to become HIV+. Certain things have to line up just right for a partner to be exposed. But when you talk responsibility in view of an anti gay HIV+ law, the word is intent and precaution. For example we know that Nick Rhoades did not have the intent to pass on HIV because he took precautions to protect his partner. That alone should have been enough to not prosecute, but when you dealing with a perceive gay sex crime they will throw the book at you and ad extra pages before sentencing. It seems this is what happened to Nick Rhoades.
He does not say what he is, you most assume he is HIV. If he says negative, you most also assume that he is not negative. So on this part of the argument the non HIV has a lot of responsibility and choices. Why then the HIV+ gets punished? Particularly when there is no harm done to the other individual. A crime without a victim. A man convicted for “what if"
For the hIV+ person who says he is not when he is, makes him a snake but not a murderer or any kind of criminal. First HIV does not work that way in which you have unprotected sex and bingo you got it. There has to be an exchange of blood or semen on a man. Also you don’t die from HIV exposure if the newly exposed gets medical help. There are also different levels of the amount of virus in the blood( detectable) to make someone a potential hiv donor but I’ll leave that one alone for another day so no one will get confuse when they hear some HIV men have not been able to pass on HIV to their negative partners in studies of couples in which one positive and the other was not HIV. The reason was the HIV+couples were undetectable when their blood was tested and no virus found or 50 copies or less in a millimeter of blood.
** This HIV man has gone through rejection, ridicule and god only knows what else. We don’t know the state of mind of these two men. Alcohol, drugs, or maybe he convinced himself he is not HIV….My point is to not forget what the HIV person is going through. The non HIV person just wants a laid. Then the responsibility should be split. No one should go to jail for having sex because that should not be the business of the government. With other deadly infections putting people in jail was never an answer because besides being unfair it made others go underground. You don’t find them they don’t get tested, no test no meds and the disease spreads. The Centers for disease control and health clinics have always been the one to follow thru on straight diseases like sylph and gonorrhea and others. Let them do their jobs with HIV.
Once you take down your pants and exchange bodily fluids with a person, you kiss that person and do sex with that person, share your body, you are doing something very serious. You are sharing the most intimate part of you. If who ever comes down with something there are good ways to deal with that other person but the criminal system. Im also trying to emphasize guys to take sex a bit more serious. People I want to date want try me out like a used car to see if it runs. Im not advocating being a virgin because I know I lost mine as soon as I went from shorts as a kid to long pants. So I can’t judge but I can say look what happens around us.
It’s a good thing to brush off on HIV of 2014 because there are many things that are known now that were unclear before. Also the meds have changed and we even have a pill for the morning after.
Meanwhile Nick Rhoades a good man, a vet who served his country is spending the best years of his life with a sentence of 25 years around his neck and still after the appeal court tosses out the case it does sends it back to where the nightmare began. With the space cadet prosecutors and homophobic HIV ignorant judge. So as justice tries to rectify it extends the suffering.
As a community we most not let this things happen. First by knowing that by blaming the other guy only serves to justify your low level of both intelligence and heart. If you had sex and nobody put a gun to your head then face the consequences wether they are good or bad. It was your choice. This has to stop first with the community that many times hates itself and its brothers.
As a community most most let the elected government that this is not permitted. Even if there has to be a federal health law to not allow one more case like this to even come to court. It serves no one, it drives the men in the state underground if they are HIV and then the epidemic gets bigger it grows by intolerance and stupidity. Lets do better.
Meanwhile we are not forgetting Nick Rhoades. I will be on top of this and post any updates keeping in mind that this problem is not fully resolved yet.
Stay safe and to Nick, hang in there.. You will come out a better man having serve as a conduit for change♥
Questions? Right here on this forum or will be referred to other forums.
My ears continue to pick up the noise from mainly Republican straights and some gays in which they argue how can we let a man spreading a deadly disease be let loose to do it again. Meanwhile he should get the 25 yrs for doing this awful deed.
First the anti gay Republicans do not care how many other gays one HIV+ person might take with them. The only thing is, it does not work like that. They still want people to go to jail and pay a price for having sex. That is at the bottom for sex prosecutions. When they (straights) go to a prostitute and get infected they want everything to get quiet and nobody arresting no one. They don’t go back to the police station and file a report so the prostitute would be arrested. But for a gay person is different and is because HIV is perceived as a gay disease, so it’s always been open season to go after gays for any reason. If gays are criticized for breaking up marriages and not only that but the whole damn institution, then gays can be blamed for anything and they do blame us for even the storm and hurricanes. You might say who listens to that? I say if it’s in the news constantly they have listeners and blind repeaters of what they hear without having their minds turn on to what it means.
I have a question though: Whose responsibility is it not to become HIV when two adults agree to have sex even though they don’t know each other, in other words a hook up
I think both…who do you think? If the answer is both why are they punishing only one on the word of the other? and putting him in jail for a long time for
most of his life?
Keeping your health is your responsibility and if you are going to have sex with a guy as a trick and you aren’t using protection that is your choice. It takes more than just having sex to become HIV+. Certain things have to line up just right for a partner to be exposed. But when you talk responsibility in view of an anti gay HIV+ law, the word is intent and precaution. For example we know that Nick Rhoades did not have the intent to pass on HIV because he took precautions to protect his partner. That alone should have been enough to not prosecute, but when you dealing with a perceive gay sex crime they will throw the book at you and ad extra pages before sentencing. It seems this is what happened to Nick Rhoades.
He does not say what he is, you most assume he is HIV. If he says negative, you most also assume that he is not negative. So on this part of the argument the non HIV has a lot of responsibility and choices. Why then the HIV+ gets punished? Particularly when there is no harm done to the other individual. A crime without a victim. A man convicted for “what if"
For the hIV+ person who says he is not when he is, makes him a snake but not a murderer or any kind of criminal. First HIV does not work that way in which you have unprotected sex and bingo you got it. There has to be an exchange of blood or semen on a man. Also you don’t die from HIV exposure if the newly exposed gets medical help. There are also different levels of the amount of virus in the blood( detectable) to make someone a potential hiv donor but I’ll leave that one alone for another day so no one will get confuse when they hear some HIV men have not been able to pass on HIV to their negative partners in studies of couples in which one positive and the other was not HIV. The reason was the HIV+couples were undetectable when their blood was tested and no virus found or 50 copies or less in a millimeter of blood.
** This HIV man has gone through rejection, ridicule and god only knows what else. We don’t know the state of mind of these two men. Alcohol, drugs, or maybe he convinced himself he is not HIV….My point is to not forget what the HIV person is going through. The non HIV person just wants a laid. Then the responsibility should be split. No one should go to jail for having sex because that should not be the business of the government. With other deadly infections putting people in jail was never an answer because besides being unfair it made others go underground. You don’t find them they don’t get tested, no test no meds and the disease spreads. The Centers for disease control and health clinics have always been the one to follow thru on straight diseases like sylph and gonorrhea and others. Let them do their jobs with HIV.
Once you take down your pants and exchange bodily fluids with a person, you kiss that person and do sex with that person, share your body, you are doing something very serious. You are sharing the most intimate part of you. If who ever comes down with something there are good ways to deal with that other person but the criminal system. Im also trying to emphasize guys to take sex a bit more serious. People I want to date want try me out like a used car to see if it runs. Im not advocating being a virgin because I know I lost mine as soon as I went from shorts as a kid to long pants. So I can’t judge but I can say look what happens around us.
It’s a good thing to brush off on HIV of 2014 because there are many things that are known now that were unclear before. Also the meds have changed and we even have a pill for the morning after.
Meanwhile Nick Rhoades a good man, a vet who served his country is spending the best years of his life with a sentence of 25 years around his neck and still after the appeal court tosses out the case it does sends it back to where the nightmare began. With the space cadet prosecutors and homophobic HIV ignorant judge. So as justice tries to rectify it extends the suffering.
As a community we most not let this things happen. First by knowing that by blaming the other guy only serves to justify your low level of both intelligence and heart. If you had sex and nobody put a gun to your head then face the consequences wether they are good or bad. It was your choice. This has to stop first with the community that many times hates itself and its brothers.
As a community most most let the elected government that this is not permitted. Even if there has to be a federal health law to not allow one more case like this to even come to court. It serves no one, it drives the men in the state underground if they are HIV and then the epidemic gets bigger it grows by intolerance and stupidity. Lets do better.
Meanwhile we are not forgetting Nick Rhoades. I will be on top of this and post any updates keeping in mind that this problem is not fully resolved yet.
Stay safe and to Nick, hang in there.. You will come out a better man having serve as a conduit for change♥
Questions? Right here on this forum or will be referred to other forums.
HIV
- Is a virus which attacks the body's immune system
- Came to prominence in the 1980s
- More than 90% of people with HIV in the UK were infected through sexual contact
- It can also be passed on by sharing infected needles or syringes
- There is no vaccine or cure however treatment is so advanced that it is no longer seen as a death sentence
- For someone diagnosed with HIV today at 35 (the average age of diagnosis in the UK) life expectancy is over 72
- The most common symptoms, usually occurring about 10 days after infection, are fever, rash and a severe sore throat all occurring together. This is rare in healthy people.
Comments