Anyone here know criminal law?

babies can be born without HIV to a HIV positive parent.

 

flowchart !

 

Any what if this occurred many years ago in a different country. And person B has a child now and they may also be HIVed? Is person A still liable if they're in Australia?

 

25% chance to be born without it.

 

But possible. It's hard to tell what degree to go into with fullylucky

 

The legislation quoted is only for Queensland. Different states have different laws for it. If it happened in another country, these laws would not apply.

 

@fullylucky it would be so much easier if you told the full story.
If it was in another country then you are liable for their laws not Australian laws.
If it was many years ago then there may have been no protection laws.
And this is why the safe sex not only stops pregnancy but sexually transmitted diseases.

 

With treatment, during pregnancy it is possible to minimise the risk of transmission to 1% IF it treatment is commenced very early in the pregnancy. But the mother would have to know she has it.

 

Hi York, thanks for your understanding.

This piece of info is very useful.

Thanks everyone for your help. I would like to keep the matter secret.

 

Does all this apply to cyber sex?....oohhh yeah baby.....now where's mi ciggies?

 

Oh I just reread this sentence. 25% chance born without it. that means 75% chance the baby has it... damn...

 

Your secret is safe with us - no one here but us chickens.

 

1. Possibly

2. Possibly

3. Unlikely

4. No

 

Yes, the internet is surprising unaware to many.

 

25% chance one of the questions is a true story??

 

NSW escort charged after allegedly infecting customer with HIV in Western Australia - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

Are you the victim or the offender?

 

I've never been asked to have a medical or bloods tests when I've changed jobs , only when I've taken out insurance ....

Never been refused insurance .

Cliff

 

I was about to post the same.
@fullylucky you've not been to W.A. recently. right ?

 

I am studying llb part time (my second degree) and just completed criminal law. I'm not a lawyer though and I'm just posting to this topic because it got my attention.

In NSW HIV would be defined as a grevious bodily disease and so meets the test for the infliction of grevious bodily harm. Each of the situations you describe effectively turns on the fault element of the offence which would differentiate it between murder and manslaughter.

So in the first instance, A commits an act, with the intention of causing grevious bodily harm which results in death is arguably murder. Where A does it without the requisite intention, it could be involuntary manslaughter. If it doesn't result in death, then it could be an assault with intention to cause grevious bodily harm.

In the final example, even though B has consented, consent is not a vitiating factor available for assault.