HIV-positive man pleads guilty to consensual sex charge: Former Emory medical student sentenced to two years in prison, eight years on probation
| I've followed this fascinating case since the beginning. It brings up so many issues, but not many answers.
I feel very sorry for Gary Carriker. He is (was) a very bright, good looking guy with a great future ahead of him as a doctor. In short, quite a catch! Now he will sit in jail for at least two years, with another 8 served on probation. Having a friend of mine in jail, my heart goes out to Carriker for the treatment he will receive from guards and other inmates there.
I'm not suggesting what he did was right. But, I've always thought there must be more to this case than is being reported. I don't have any theories about what it might be, but it's nagging to me. It would make more sense to me if some disgruntled ex-fling got pissed off and filed charges against Carriker -- typical scorned lover stuff. But, for it to happen multiple times seems strange.
Barebacking is a VERY common practice these days. It seems that everybody -- especially younger gay guys -- are doing it bare more often than safe. It amazes me the guys who are not only willing to have unprotected sex, but who actually don't have sex any other way -- no questions asked. Hell, there's even a specific chat room on Gay.com
for guys who prefer things "raw".
Again, no excuses for Carriker, although I do feel sorry for him. Our decisions have consequences. Having said that, it takes two to tango and the responsibility for protection lies with both consenting adults. This was not rape... it was consensual. The decisions of Carriker's partners have consequences too.
Bottom line: if you're going to have unprotected sex these days, you need to assume
you are doing so with an HIV+ person.
I don't know the specific facts in this case, however, I would assume that in order to prosecute somebody under this law, the person would have to affirmatively tell someone that they are HIV negative, when they KNEW they were HIV positive instead, and went ahead and had sex with the other person. In such a case, the person should rot in jail for a couple of years.
I don't disagree with you. As I understand the case, there was no disclosure whatsoever. I haven't read anything where Carriker represented that he was HIV negative. My main point was that IF there was no disclosure or even any discussion about it, the other person who consented to unprotected sex certainly shares equal responsibility for stupidity.
Agreed ... if that's the case.
The news media reported in the court proceedings that Carriker lied and said he was negative in order to have unprotected sex when he was infact positive.