News
TREASURE ISLAND — Their relationship lasted nearly four years. But it wasn't until afterward, police said, that one of the men found out the other had been HIV positive the whole time they were together.
He said his former boyfriend never told him.
In Florida, there's a law against that. The former boyfriend was arrested earlier this month on the felony charge.
But now the other man is struggling to understand why an appellate court ruled that it's a crime only if a man is having sexual relations with a woman.
That's according to the 2nd District Court of Appeal, which blamed the Florida Legislature's wording of the law when it was written at least two decades ago.
That means the law doesn't apply to those most at risk: gay and bisexual men.
In 2006, men who had relations with other men made up 53 percent of new HIV infections in the United States, according to the federal government.
"I don't want to say Florida law is homophobic," said Aaron Slavin, the defense attorney in this case. "But it is outdated."
So the Pinellas-Pasco State Attorney's Office said it had no choice but to drop the charge this week.
"The facts as we believe them to be have not changed," said Assistant State Attorney Kendall Davidson. "It's the construction of the statute that caused us to drop our case.
"The statue is still valid. But it doesn't protect everybody."
• • •
The 2nd DCA ruled on an appeal from a Manatee County woman convicted of violating the HIV statute while having relations with another woman.
"There is no dispute that (the defendant) is HIV positive and that she failed to inform the victim of her status," the judges wrote in their ruling.
But does the law apply to her? That is what the judges had to decide. The statute says it is "unlawful" for someone who knowingly has HIV to have "sexual intercourse" with another without the other's "consent."
The problem, the court said, is how Florida law defines "sexual intercourse." The only definition the judges found was "the penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ."
That kind of language doesn't exist in Florida's sexual battery statute. It broadly defines rape.
"We presume that the Legislature knows the meaning of the words it uses," the judges wrote.
"The result here is neither unreasonable nor ridiculous; it is merely an application of the statutory language to (the defendant's) actions."
• • •
The 2nd DCA overturned the Manatee woman's conviction. The Attorney General's Office will not appeal the case to the state Florida Supreme Court.
Since that appellate court oversees Pinellas, the ruling applies to the Treasure Island HIV case.
The St. Petersburg Times is not naming either of the men involved in this case. One was not named in a previous story because police said then he was the victim of a sex-related crime. The other no longer faces charges, but the arrest revealed his medical condition.
"It was upsetting," said the 27-year-old man who said he never knew his former partner had HIV. "The law isn't updated, and that is the problem. Especially for a community that faces such a high risk."
He continues to be tested for HIV with negative results. But now he has another problem: "I'm having trouble finding anyone to speak for me."
He wants the Legislature to fix the law, but can't find any gay organizations to take up his cause. That's because many in the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community oppose laws criminalizing the transmission of HIV.
"There is no proof that these laws work to encourage disclosure or safe sex practices," said Scott Schoettes of Lambda Legal, a civil rights group for the LGBT community. "We should be creating an environment in which people feel they can share that information and be free from stigma and discrimination.
"Unfortunately we're a long way from that."
Times researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.
Loading...
