In my opionion, Sarah Jane Porter has committed an act that will result in the pre-meditated murder of a man whom she persuaded to have natural sex with her in the clear knowledge that she would infect him with HIV. Having been prosecuted and found guilty of the lesser crime of GBH, she has committed murder and has been given a 36 month custodial sentence, of which she may well serve less than 24 months. How many other men and women out there are planning and carrying out similar murders? Will those numbers snowball now that is clear the law is a complete ***? For the record, this site edited my comparison of the law to a four legged beast of burden, not me!
2006-06-19 06:14:59 · 10 answers · asked by chris_mcburney 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I agree with you. It´s like a biological weapon. And it kills.
2006-06-19 06:18:32 · answer #1 · answered by NEOFROZENED 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I'm pretty sure it won't be Sarah-Jane and it definitely won't be Jack (Face of Boe stuff, dire message to give to the Doctor and whatnot!). URG!!!! I am so confused as in who will die, as all the companions are very faithful to the Doctor... There is a lot of speculation about Donna dying, which kinda makes a bit of sense because there are all the signs and stuff, but I am not entirely convinced. It is only a 33.3 (infinity) chance that either her, Martha or Rose will die, who knows? I wasn't expecting the regeneration so I am still thinking that anything is possible! If I had to hazard a guess I think it would be Rose or Donna. That is entirely a wild guess but there is a fair chance that anything could happen! OK! My slight reason for Rose is because she has known the Doctor for a long time and has remained faithful for all that time. And my reason for Donna is that Catherine Tate's contact comes to an end at the end of this series. I don't know why but Martha, well, I just don't think she will die. I'm not sure why. Well, it is only a few more days to go and I am beginning to be a bit impatient now. I want NEWS!!!!! But yes, just a few more days...
2016-03-26 21:39:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree. She knowingly and wilfully put another persons life at risk by having unprotected sex with a man with full knowledge of her own health status. The onus was on her to protect other people around her. I mean she didn't have a cold or the clap. Crimes like this may also give ideas to very sick angry, bitter people who feel its there right to infect others. I wonder what Porter's circumstances were. Was she incredibly bitter about her own predicament and her future. That was never mentioned but would be interesting to know. The law should most definitely be ammended. Very sad case.
2006-06-19 06:26:10 · answer #3 · answered by Melok 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Every person who engages in unprotected sex is implicitly agreeing that he may contract a potentially fatal disease as a result.
Attempting to characterize this as being in the same category with a punk who guns down an old lady for her purse is extreme hyperbole.
The lesson to be taken is that if a person does not want to contract a disease, possibly fatal, don't have unprotected sex.
2006-06-19 06:22:19 · answer #4 · answered by Left the building 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i agree its a planned slow murder, no matter how you look at it she intended for that person to catch the diesese, so she should be jailed for atempted murder for a start. As this hasnt been made an example off in the courts this will now fuel others brain dead poeple to do the same as they no that they can ruin someones life but only pay a short sentece for it if that.
******* stupid !!!!!!!
2006-06-19 06:20:44 · answer #5 · answered by springbabe 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
as far as im concerned she should be found guilty of murder. having unprotected sex and being aware of having hiv is as good as murder. at the end of the day if you have hiv it is a form of murder wepon
2006-06-19 06:26:05 · answer #6 · answered by tracy w 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anyone having sex in the time of AIDS needs to take their own protective measures with someone who they are not familiar with, no matter WHAT they say.
It takes two to transmit a disease.
2006-06-19 06:19:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I had never thought of that, if you knowingly infect someone with HIV and they die, that is manslaughter. You wernt intending to kill them but they died as a result of something you did..that should be punished..
2006-06-19 06:19:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I personally know one guy have aids and he don't care who he pass it on to.
It frustration me to see another person have to died because of him
and I know the person personally that he passed it on to
2006-06-19 06:35:02 · answer #9 · answered by n K 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you if you have a disease this deadly then there are certain precautions you should take
2006-06-19 06:21:03 · answer #10 · answered by Pretty Brown Eyes 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋