Should Victims Receive Compensation for 'Surprise STDs'?
SodaHead News
2012/06/07 18:57:51
|
|
|||||
|
481 votes
|
|
44% | |||
|
601 votes
|
|
56% | |||
A 49-year-old Oregon woman found a little bit of respite this week when the court awarded her a whopping $900,000 as compensation for contracting herpes from a 69-year-old man on their fourth date. According to the L.A. Times, the jury decided the woman was only "25% responsible" for contracting the STD because the man failed to tell her that he had it before they had sex.
Randall Vogt, attorney for the plaintiff, explained, "He was 69, my client was a very attractive 49. My argument to the jury was he just wanted to sink his hooks into her." There were also suggestions of battery ("aggressive consummation"), which made it impossible for her to put a condom on him, and she was able to give evidence that she had not had the STD prior to the encounter. They met on eHarmony. Do you think it's fair to grant the unknowning recipient of an STD legal compensation?
Randall Vogt, attorney for the plaintiff, explained, "He was 69, my client was a very attractive 49. My argument to the jury was he just wanted to sink his hooks into her." There were also suggestions of battery ("aggressive consummation"), which made it impossible for her to put a condom on him, and she was able to give evidence that she had not had the STD prior to the encounter. They met on eHarmony. Do you think it's fair to grant the unknowning recipient of an STD legal compensation?
West o' th' Pecos, they might call someones' hoochie, now infected, "ruurnt."
..and the kick that she "had no proof" that she didn't already have a STD??...wow... I dont understand how they awarded her 900,000$
It still doesn't mean that she didn't sleep with someone else the same day or two or three or weeks before she was with him... .. its ludicrous either way... how exactly do you prove you haven't had sex with someone else that gave it to you???
bottom line is that a lot of people should learn from this... now not only do you have to worry about getting stds--but there is successful civil suits that have set precedents where you can also be sued if you have one, dont openly disclose it, and spread it. Noe It'll not just get your peepee but your pocketbook too.
I'm blessed that im happily married and dont have to worry about this crap in my own life.
but otherwise it's their own damn fault
This woman from Oregon met a man twenty years older than her on an online dating site, went on only FOUR dates with him, had sex, and oh, SURPRISE! Herpes!
Maybe she should have made sure of his trustworthiness first BEFORE deciding to have aggressive, unprotected sex with this guy. 'Normal' people usually date for a year or more before doing anything serious like having sex.
By the way, $900,000 for her being "25% responsible"? If she was responsible for catching herpes in any way at all (which the jury said yes to), then she shouldn't have gotten ANYTHING.
What's amazing to me is how quickly responsibility and self-accountability have been vanishing over the last five years alone.
Thus , providing double protection . Fact where, or how they met, or for how long they knew eachother , has no foundation with this case . Case is , She got a disease from a man, who had not told her any warnings, that " yes " , He had STD's . He failed to inform her . Yet, She possibly failed to ask . We are all humans, & about 90% of our species do enjoy sex . We first need to grasp that , & handle it, accordingly .
It is the , fact, of life . Humans use it to procreate , & for pleasure . The act, is to enjoy . Not to cause harm, in any shape, or form . Obviously, He caused harm to Her.
(If she were blind, would the case , been handled, differently ?)