Should Victims Receive Compensation for 'Surprise STDs'?

by SodaHead News Posted 2012/06/07 18:57:51

Related Topics: Stds, herpes, Money, Court, Eharmony, dating, Sex, Time, Online, Oregon

1,082 votes
Read all 1,440 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	481 votes	44%
	No	601 votes	56%

A 49-year-old Oregon woman found a little bit of respite this week when the court awarded her a whopping $900,000 as compensation for contracting herpes from a 69-year-old man on their fourth date. According to the L.A. Times, the jury decided the woman was only "25% responsible" for contracting the STD because the man failed to tell her that he had it before they had sex.

Randall Vogt, attorney for the plaintiff, explained, "He was 69, my client was a very attractive 49. My argument to the jury was he just wanted to sink his hooks into her." There were also suggestions of battery ("aggressive consummation"), which made it impossible for her to put a condom on him, and she was able to give evidence that she had not had the STD prior to the encounter. They met on eHarmony. Do you think it's fair to grant the unknowning recipient of an STD legal compensation?

+33

Add a comment above

Vitalani 2012/06/07 19:07:12

No

+24
I find it amusing that I am smarter when it comes to safe sex than a 49 year old...
>> See Replies

More polls by SodaHead News

Common ... to El Prez 2012/06/07 20:02:01

She's an idiot and deserves what she got.

reply
El Prez to Common ... 2012/06/08 22:31:12

+1
If idiots got what they deserved you would have cramps in your fingers.

reply
Common ... to El Prez 2012/06/10 19:46:55

I don't have diseases, do you know why? I'm not an idiot and I don't have sex with people I do not know. She's 100% to blame.

reply
El Prez to Common ... 2012/06/11 17:43:06

+1
Thanks judge!! You prove my point exactly. You may support a good team but you are playing an idiot on the internet.

reply
Common ... to El Prez 2012/06/11 21:01:50

No, I use common sense. She's 100% to blame and her own victim of idiocy.

reply
El Prez to Common ... 2012/06/11 23:45:30

+1
She did know the guy. He lied or withheld crutial information. That is a deliberate attack. I am tired of this line of discussion. You obviously have your mind made up. So be it!!

reply
Common ... to El Prez 2012/06/12 01:16:45

+1
She knew the guy for 3 dates. And I could care less if she knew him for 5 years because had she known the man she wouldn't have had sex in the 1st place.

Brilliant!!!

reply
TKramar to Common ... 2012/06/12 15:36:07

If she knew him for five years, she might have known he was too risky to be sleeping with.

reply
Common ... to TKramar 2012/06/12 21:27:10

But she didn't.

reply
TKramar to Common ... 2012/06/12 21:31:10

That's what makes her an idiot. She didn't take the time to get to know him properly.

reply
El Prez to Common ... 2012/06/12 17:35:43

+1
Right again!!! Your brilliance shows through in your words and ideas. it is obvious that the courts and the jury did not agree with you in this case. I am sure that is true for many decisions handed down in modern time, the decisions do not support your view. So be it!! We are left with just your brilliance!!!

reply
Common ... to El Prez 2012/06/12 21:28:57

Question, has the man paid the $900K? Has he appealed the decision? Just because a court makes a decision doesn't mean it's going to stay put.

reply
El Prez to Common ... 2012/06/12 22:14:24

+1
Right again!

reply
TKramar to El Prez 2012/06/12 21:32:10

Who needs courts? They too often make the wrong decision.

reply
exhon2009 2012/06/07 19:19:59

Yes

+3
If one partner knows they have an STD and conceal it from the other absolutely, they are liable.

reply
Rusty S... to exhon2009 2012/06/07 19:34:51

+1
Does she bear any responsibility for choosing to have unprotected sex?

reply
exhon2009 to Rusty S... 2012/06/07 19:37:33

Yes, that's probably why it wasn't a 1,000,000 judgment.

reply
El Prez to Rusty S... 2012/06/12 22:15:44

The jury said 25% responsibility. The 75% went to the guy who failed to disclose his condition OR to take any precautions.

reply
Common ... to exhon2009 2012/06/07 20:03:07

The only thing she deserves is what she got. A disease because she's an idiot. BTW, I'd bet lots of money this guy is very wealthy.

reply
exhon2009 to Common ... 2012/06/07 20:06:40

If she were your sister you'd probably want to inflict physical harm on the man. If someone has aids and has unprotected sex with someone without telling them they can be charged with a criminal offense.

reply
Common ... to exhon2009 2012/06/07 20:12:02

I would tell my sister that she's an idiot. 100% idiot. She got what she bargained for.

Brilliant!!!

reply
exhon2009 to Common ... 2012/06/07 20:26:23

I too would tell my sister she's an idiot. Then I'd put the guy in the hospital. You see, I'm also a Raider fan.

reply
Common ... to exhon2009 2012/06/07 23:06:08

And a liberal.

reply
exhon2009 to Common ... 2012/06/08 00:57:24

Go check some of my posts if you think I'm a liberal.

reply
Common ... to exhon2009 2012/06/08 03:58:25

Are you?

reply
TKramar to exhon2009 2012/06/07 22:30:38

+1
actually, my sister's an adult, I'm not getting involved in her relationships. If she didn't marry a guy who could be loyal to her, that's her fault, not any of my business at all.

reply
Sinister Ken Doll™ 2012/06/07 19:18:27 (edited)

Yes

+2
i saw this thing on tv once where this dude was dating a bunch of women and giving them AIDS on purpose

like, he was a serial AIDS transmitter

not cool

reply
2468 to Siniste... 2012/06/07 19:28:14

That could be considered some form of attempted homicide or homicide.

reply
Common ... to 2468 2012/06/07 20:04:53

Yea, by the idiot having sex with an AIDS person.

Brilliant!!!

reply
Common ... to Siniste... 2012/06/07 20:04:22

How about knowing who you're having sex with?

Brilliant!!!

reply
Siniste... to Common ... 2012/06/07 20:25:27

apparently on the show, he never told them he had the disease, and was actually with them for years

reply
Common ... to Siniste... 2012/06/07 23:07:13

That's 100% on her. Nobody else. Bet lots of cash this guy is very wealthy. She's in it to win it either way.

Brilliant!!!

reply
shansera 2012/06/07 19:17:16

Yes

+2
Only in the case of sexual assault. I make all my partners take a STD/HIV test BEFORE even protected sex. People lie and sometimes don't even know that they have an STD, lots of people never have symptoms of common STDS. Always better safe than sorry!

reply
maria carbajal 2012/06/07 19:17:09

Yes

+1
Now days...you have to find out if the person your going to have sex with has been checked for any kind of diseases. The other option is celibacy, which most people do not believe in.

I feel that eHarmony or any other dating agency should have everyone be seen by a doctor, so that this doesn't happen again. Just saying.

reply
Common ... to maria c... 2012/06/07 20:05:45

She's an idiot and a gold digger.

reply
♒ßεllεchεvεllε®♒ 2012/06/07 19:16:51

No

+2
WTF? Personal accountability and responsibility.

reply
StevenH... to ♒ßεllεc... 2012/06/07 19:34:47

+1
Exactly, and if you knowingly transmit a disease to someone against their will you should be held accountable

reply
tom C 2012/06/07 19:15:44

No

+2
on eharmony....
that means they had emailed each other over a period of time....
it also means he was a scum bag for not telling her...but in the end ,
how well did she really know this guy,,,and how stupid is it to go with a stranger
for unprotected sex...

reply
StevenH... to tom C 2012/06/07 19:38:19

Stupid or not, the greater responsibility should be on the one with the knowledge. If you knowingly transmit a disease against the person's wil; you should be held accountable.

reply
tom C to StevenH... 2012/06/07 19:44:45 (edited)

+1
she had knowledge...that she didn't know him well....but did she ask him about protection?
I agree he is more at fault...but she's not totally innocent...

reply