Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Toronto man arrested for unprotected gay sex
05.08.2009 4:11pm EDT
(Toronto, Ontario) A Toronto man has been charged with attempted murder and aggravated assault to allegedly having unprotected sex with another man and for not disclosing that he is HIV-positive.
Sahand Mahmoodi, 28, appeared briefly in court Friday morning to hear the charges read. He was remanded in custody awaiting trial.He was arrested on Wednesday after the man with whom he had sex filed a complaint, police said. Det.-Const. Brad Stapleton declined to say if the complainant had become HIV-positive. The two men online in a gay chat site.
Mahmoodi has been positive since 2000, said Stapleton, adding that police believe he has been sexually active without telling partners he has the virus.
Stapleton said that Mahmoodi is a regular in Toronto’s gay village and urged others who may have come in contact with him to contact police and get tested for AIDS.
Under Canadian law it is a criminal offense for anyone with HIV not to disclose their status before engaging in unprotected sex. About 80 charges arrests have been made over the past decade.
But many people working with HIV/AIDS are critical of police pressing charges, fearing it will dissuade people from getting tested. They also raise concerns that the law is not well defined.
“Where is this law going? When are uncertainties in the law going to be addressed?” Alison Symington, a senior policy analyst with the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network told The Globe and Mail newspaper.
“This area of law has been escalating and developing over the past few years with no public policy debate, no research backing it up, nothing to show how it’s been effective,” Symington said.
But other AIDS specialists disagree.
Dr. Philip Berger, an associate professor of Medicine at the University of Toronto said people must be held accountable if they deliberately infect someone else.
“Being HIV positive cannot provide moral cover for unacceptable conduct,” he told The Globe.
Second comment. Read all the posts. Yes, in a perfect world Poz guys would disclose, and keep it wrapped … and all other guys would insist on safe sex only. BUT, most men will lie like a rug to get laid, and, unfortunately there are a lot of reckless, irresponsible, stupid people who think they are immune, or simply don’t care what they catch, or whom they pass it on to. A straight gal friend of mine is now poz because the creep she was dating gave it to her, and knew he was poz all along. She broke up with him, but won’t file charges. This is not just a Gay issue. She has been very ill for several years now, and has not dated anyone else since. If you cannot trust the person you love, and are in a long term relationship with,
why bother? Is it rude, and distrustful, to ask your long term ‘monogamous’ life partner to always wear a condom? We have seat belt laws, and need, ‘keep it wrapped’, laws too apparently.
Good! There are similar laws around the US that are never enforced. It is, and should be, illegal to knowlingly transmit an STD to another person. I actually think unprotected sex should be illegal generally. How can anyone intelligently argue in support of it? Since the defendant knowlingly risked the lives of others, it is good that he was arrested.
It is against the law in Canada – as it should be in the US. Maybe the law should be amended to say anyone who has HIV and sex with someone who does not have HIV is liable.
Having come to age in the 1980’s, I’m amazed that attitudes towards HIV have not changed more. Yes, we’ve come far from the point that people were afraid to touch people with HIV but the fact of these laws existing (and yes they are here in the US as well) is evident that we have much further to go.
I’m certainly not condoning anyone not disclosing their status. But honestly, many have sex and do not know if they are or are not Poz. What’s next? Arresting people that do not know that they were Poz and maybe transmitted the virus? It all goes back to personal responsibility and assumption of risk. We all make choices as to if we do or do not use protection. To not do so comes with inherent risk of more than just HIV.
As they say, if you choose to dance you must pay the fiddler.
I hope the man is convicted for knowingly potentially infecting someone with a deadly virus.
People will HIV need to be honest about their infection with their sexual partners. Obviously, they need not disclose this to everyone, but if the infected person is going to engage in a high risk activity, then they need to let the other person know so they can make an informed decision.
That being said, why would anyone have unprotected sex with anyone. The other party is innocent, but he is still utterly stupid. He still does not deserve to be willingly exposed to a deadly virus.
A few years ago, there was a person who returned to Toronto from an Asian country. The person was infected with a strain of avian flu which was then appearing across East and Southeast Asia, and was under voluntary quarantine. The person chose to attend a funeral service for a friend at a Catholic church with a primarily Filipino congregation. This was the start of SARS in Toronto, and that selfish gesture killed 40-odd people, left a few dozen others with permanent respiratory damage, and did hundreds of millions of dollars in economic damage.
People with HIV in the US and Canada were not subject to the same public-health restrictions (e.g. quarantine) as might be imposed with other infectious diseases. It’s legally possible to force somebody with exceptionally virulent pneumonia to undergo treatment because of a clear and recognized threat to the general public. Try the same approach with HIV and you’ll shortly find yourself in federal court.
The awareness of the sexual partner is less important than Sahand Mahmoodi concealing his status. He’s withholding important and relevant information. If you go into a bank with a toy gun and rob it, you’re still facing a gun spec on your case because you presented an item which appeared to be a gun. (In the US, this principle also extends to drugs; if you have little baggies of baking soda but present them as coke, you can still be at least charged with intent to distribute.)
Mahmoodi doesn’t merit any sympathy. He and only he is ultimately responsible for his HIV. It’s my friends who have HIV who tell me the same thing.
I’m always torn on this stuff
On the one hand, you have to protect your self. You have to take responsibility for your actions.
On the other hand, if you are HIV+ and knowingly have unprotected sex with someone who is not you should be punished.
Attempted murder charges seem a bit extreme. Assault? Maybe
Menstruator, I don’t understand what your point is.
Are you referring to the Canadian government? There are also some of these ill-advised laws here in the U.S.
What do you mean by “gays killing gay”? Do you mean HIV transmission, or do you mean some of the vicious, rabid, knee-jerk responses here?
I used the term ill-advised because the only “proof” being used in these cases is the word of the “victim.” I think that if a person engages in unprotected sex once, they’ve probably done it several times, so how do we know when the virus was actually transmitted? Is the sex life of said “victim” being completely and exhaustively investigated to ensure that we know who transmitted what? Or is this just a witch hunt? I suspect the latter.
get tested for AIDS?
uhm, you would get tested for HIV.
This is what the government wants. Gays killing gays. There is no need. Canada looks more attractive every day. Too often we hear of these cases with male on male sex. Wish more wives would take legal action when their husbands give them hiv.
There is responsibility to be borne on both sides here. Since the law is “having unprotected sex with another man and for not disclosing that he is HIV-positive”…the key word there is unprotected. If the “victim” hooked up with someone online and then did not protect himself accordingly, he shares part of the blame. Yes, it’s reprehensible not to inform a partner of a poz status, but it’s also reprehensible, if not stupid, to engage in unprotected sex in this day and age. Responsibility and protection go both ways.
“Biba Said: HIV is not a death sentence…”
You’re not trolling even, are you? *shakes head in utter pity at your ignorance*
Please anyone who read that and thinks it is somehow true, do your own research, and I mean serious research, and then go ask someone who has HIV or AIDS about how they feel about it.
As for unprotected sex, well it does take two to tango, and if people are naive enough to think that their sexual partner will disclose their status be it HIV or Herpes, or UTI, they are seriously deluded. Better safe than sorry.
That said, there needs to be some sort of consequence for knowing your own status and having unprotected sex. Attempted murder is a bit much, but something needs to be done in order to knock some sense into the dumbfrocks who simply do not care what they do or who they infect, provided they get their actual or metaphorical rocks off. Women do this as well, it is my no means men only who run around spreading this disease through negligence and wilful ignorance and insane lust.
What other non-fatal communicable disease will be next? Swine flu, perhaps?
You guys make HIV+ people out to be killers. What the HELL is your problem? Some people make horrid choices, and yes, some make choices that effect others. This is no different than not disclosing you’re married. The spouse of the one cheating can come and instantly kill the “other woman or man.”
Behavior like these comments shy people away from getting tested if they even think they’re positive. Don’t judge a fool until you’ve actually walked in their shoes. These comments I’ve read make me wanna hurl, and I’m not even positive. YES, if someone IS positive it is their obligation to disclose thier status. IF the partner chooses to have sex with him/her, it is THEIR obligation to ask. Even after that, if they want their health intact, wear a jimmy cap.
Sahand Mahmoodi should be shot eh? Here I thought we were better than the breeders(which we are ultimately). Death penalties are for ignorant backward third world religious dictatorships Ms. Jessica. Now, before you go spoutin’ off the diatribe about how this Mahmoodi guy was in fact passing a death penalty off on his “innocent” victims please bear in mind that, supposedly, we are informed and educated adults here. If the age of AIDS has taught us at least ONE thing here it’s this: You roll the dice, you take yer chances. That super hot lookin’ dude at the other end of the bar could be HIV+, OR he could be neg. ASSUME that all hot lookin’ dudes are in FACT pos. and PLAN accordingly. Ain’t no-one here gonna hold yer hand and walk you through the magic pathway of life. You weigh your options, you plan your actions. “Safe sex” may not be 100% guaranteed protection BUT until there’s a cure USE CONDOMS and USE THEM CORRECTLY!! It has been scientifically PROVEN that condoms do greatly REDUCE the risk of HIV transmission(in spite of what the head queen of the vatican says). Think before you hump. Peace out.