# Guilty plea in HIV-assault case



## JasonH (29 Nov 2005)

Guilty plea in HIV-assault case
Last updated Nov 28 2005 09:22 AM EST
CBC News

An HIV-positive woman from Newfoundland has pleaded guilty to an assault charge for having sex with a soldier at an Ontario military base.

Jennifer Murphy, 32, has been in custody since military police arrested her in March.

On Friday, Murphy pleaded guilty in a Barrie court to one count of aggravated assault involving a solider at Canadian Forces Base Borden.

Other charges against her have been dropped.

Details of the case will be read into the court record in December, when she will be sentenced.

In previous interviews, Murphy said she was outraged about how she was treated. Military officials had urged anyone who had had sexual contact with her to see a doctor.

Murphy was arrested after visiting with friends at the base, where her husband had trained.

She said she blacked out during the incident for which she was charged, and could not recall what happened.

http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/story/to_hiv20051128.html


----------



## rdt2449 (29 Nov 2005)

Blacked out? cmon give me a break.
yea imagin everytime a wife beater said that " OH i blacked out and i dont know what happned but when i woke up she had a black eye!"


----------



## Slim (29 Nov 2005)

rdt2449 said:
			
		

> Blacked out? cmon give me a break.
> yea imagin everytime a wife beater said that " OH i blacked out and i dont know what happned but when i woke up she had a black eye!"



"Blacked out..."

I guess that makes everything forgivalbe and all right. :


----------



## camochick (29 Nov 2005)

Should she have disclosed her HIV status to all of her partners? Of course. Were these boys kidnapped and forced to have sex with her? I don't think so. It's sad how she is being painted as the slut when it's obvious that there were a lot of boys who thought nothing of taking some woman home from a bar, an extremely drunk woman at that. One can only hope this serves as a wake up call for everyone.


----------



## 48Highlander (29 Nov 2005)

Painted as the slut?

As far as I can tell, the police didn't charge her with "being a slut", they charged her with assault for infecting the guy with HIV.  



_edited after kevin's comment_


----------



## KevinB (29 Nov 2005)

The moral of the story is don't be silly, wrap your willy.


----------



## Jarnhamar (29 Nov 2005)

> Should she have disclosed her HIV status to all of her partners? Of course. Were these boys kidnapped and forced to have sex with her? I don't think so.



Of course they were not forced but I think the point is - would they have had sex with her if she had told them she was HIV positive?
She _knew_ she was HIV positive.  She could have told them she was yet she choose not to.


----------



## FredDaHead (29 Nov 2005)

camochick said:
			
		

> It's sad how she is being painted as the slut when it's obvious that there were a lot of boys who thought nothing of taking some woman home from a bar, an extremely drunk woman at that.



I'm not saying you're lying, because I haven't read any article on this in a while, but from what I recall, there was no mention of her being "extremely drunk" or even of them picking her up at a bar.

The story, from what I recall, is that she went up to the Singles' barracks and offered random stranger sex.

Now, sleeping with a few men doesn't make a woman a slut. We're a pretty liberal place and a woman (or man) can have sex with whoever they please. Sure.

Going up to random strangers and offering them sex does make her a slut, however.

But, I think, as Ghost said, the point isn't that they had sex. The point is she knowingly lied to them about something potentially fatal.

Let's say I hand you something that I know for a fact has a good chance of killing you, but I don't tell you about it, and, say, it maims you. Am I innocent of any wrongdoing because you accepted whatever I handed to you? (ie, I didn't FORCE you to take it) Am I innocent because you didn't take enough precautions? Am I innocent because you didn't ask me if it was dangerous?

If I follow your logic, I think I'd have to answer yes to the above.

This woman should suffer the full extent of the law. Nothing more, and definately nothing less.

_(Be it noted that the comments in this post are my opinions and mine alone. You don't have to agree. In fact, it's more fun if you don't. But I don't want to get into a long argument; I have papers to write and finals to prepare.)_


----------



## Guy. E (29 Nov 2005)

i believe that she _could_ be charged for attempted murder? 

there are two parts of committing a crime, Mindfull intent and Wrongfull action.

             : she knew what she has is dangerous and infective and incurable
             : she had the responsibility to tell him, but didn't


she should go to gaol

he should smarten up and ask questions/ ware a condom i think. you cant go to gaol for just being stupid.


----------



## Pte_Martin (29 Nov 2005)

Guy. E said:
			
		

> i believe that she _could_ be charged for attempted murder?
> 
> there are two parts of committing a crime, Mindfull intent and Wrongfull action.
> 
> ...



First of all you have to learn how to spell , and second when you have sex with someone do you ask 20 questions with him or her?


----------



## combat_medic (29 Nov 2005)

This has nothing to do with her being a slut. I've been to Borden and seen how people there fornicate like monkeys in the shacks, and that's their own business. However, I imagine the charges against this girl would be the same if she had had sex with the guy in the confines of a monogamous relationship.

I've also seen men charged with the same thing after knowingly infecting their partners with HIV. This isn't punishing her for being sexually active, this is punishing her for taking a good few decades off of someone's life. She's being charged, and rightfully so. 

Should the guy have used a condom? Yeah. Does that give anyone the right to infect him with a deadly disease? Not at all. They both made stupid decisions, and he's already paying for his, and will be paying for it for the rest of his life. It's only fair that she should do the same.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (29 Nov 2005)

RHFC said:
			
		

> First of all you have to learn how to spell , and second *when you have sex with someone do you ask 20 questions with him or her?*



If it's someone you don't know, or in cases do, you'd be an absolute idiot if you didn't. Youthful stupidity/ bravado has landed more than one young person in the hospital and morgue.


----------



## Infanteer (29 Nov 2005)

RHFC said:
			
		

> First of all you have to learn how to spell



Although the post seems to be lacking an edit, make sure you do your homework before trying to lay the smackdown on someone else.

gaol


----------



## 48Highlander (29 Nov 2005)

recceguy said:
			
		

> If it's someone you don't know, or in cases do, you'd be an absolute idiot if you didn't. Youthful stupidity/ bravado has landed more than one young person in the hospital and morgue.



Mhm, I could just see that being worked into a pickup line.

"Hey, would you mind filling out a questionnaire..."


----------



## Pte_Martin (29 Nov 2005)

Dang... I'll make sure i do my research before i attack somebody


----------



## Fishbone Jones (29 Nov 2005)

48Highlander said:
			
		

> Mhm, I could just see that being worked into a pickup line.
> 
> "Hey, would you mind filling out a questionnaire..."



It's called "conversation". A Neanderthal may not understand the concept, but anyone with a modicum of education would.


----------



## KevinB (29 Nov 2005)

Quite obviously there are things you just don't do with a one night stand... I've had the good fortune that the "few" foolish episodes of one nighters and/or shack rats I was either wrapped or very lucky.  Personally I would be more worried about getting something off a shackrat that had gotten something off a troop - than the shackrat herself.


Knowing she was infected - she had a duty of care to follow and she did not.


----------



## 48Highlander (29 Nov 2005)

recceguy said:
			
		

> It's called "conversation". A Neanderthal may not understand the concept, but anyone with a modicum of education would.



Conversation?  You must not know the women in Petawawa very well....


----------



## Strike (29 Nov 2005)

> Conversation?  You must not know the women in Petawawa very well....



Actually, I find the guys are the ones with this difficulty out here.


----------



## qor556 (29 Nov 2005)

True i guess, haven't spent much time in the ranks I see...


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (29 Nov 2005)

Back on topic please...


----------



## pbi (30 Nov 2005)

RHFC said:
			
		

> First of all you have to learn how to spell , and second when you have sex with someone do you ask 20 questions with him or her?



Actually, gaol is the original (although very ancient) English correct spelling.

This thread reminded me of a rather idiotic radio talk show I was listening to while sitting in a GTA traffic jam the other night. It is called "Radical Reverend" and is (I think) broadcast on UofT Radio. A quite leftish female revered invites all sorts to give their opinions on various burning social issues: you get the idea.

Anyway the subject was the increase of HIV infection in Canada, after a period of decline. The phone-in guest, an AIDS activist, was holding forth at length at how this resurgence of HIV was clearly the fault of the government (all governments, I guess...) because they don't run a big AIDs publicity campaign as they did a few years ago. Because of this neglect, he claimed, young people did not know how to protect themselves against AIDS and thus were spreading the infection. I noticed that nowhere in the mutual agreement of these two fools was there any mention, at all, of the idea that people have any kind of duty to act responsibly, or take action concerning their own health. I guess if the Government does not tell people to, they will stop eating, or bathing, or going to the doctor, etc.

Then the Radical Reverend asked the phone-in guest what his opinion was about the case in Borden (which she misidentified as a female in the CF). Predictably, he again launched off on a tangent that avoided any reference to individual responsibility or care for others, and suggested that if we "criminalize" people who knowingly spread AIDS then people will not want to seek treatment. I didn't get this part: it seems to me that most people would want to make damned sure they were NOT infected, and thus seek treatment.

Interesing how so many people on the political extremes seem willing to relieve us of all responsibility.

Cheers


----------



## 3rd Horseman (30 Nov 2005)

I hope she goes down big for this one..(no pun intended)   and sleeping randomly with strange people in the same evening is the definition of a slut. ****  ****  ****  ****,  how else would we have found out about the two Bs. Ahhhh Borden has not changed.







Edit by mod for innapropriate comments.


----------



## newfie_chick (1 Dec 2005)

okay i know i'm not army but what i am is a good friend of jenny....there is alot you don't know about her and i guess alot of you dont care.. she is a good person and take this from someone who has known her for a long long time . i just wanted to say something in her defense and to let her know all is good and i'll be here for her what ever comes from this ..cheers from nl


----------



## KevinB (1 Dec 2005)

Well I am sorry I cant accept the "good person" routine.

 I'm not going to judge her for sleeping with a few people (even the same night) - but I will judge her for knowingly sleeping with people unprotected while she had HIV.


----------



## Michael OLeary (1 Dec 2005)

newfie_chick said:
			
		

> okay i know i'm not army but what i am is a good friend of jenny....there is alot you don't know about her and i guess alot of you dont care.. she is a good person and take this from someone who has known her for a long long time . i just wanted to say something in her defense and to let her know all is good and i'll be here for her what ever comes from this ..cheers from nl



But will you warn any guys she tries to pick up in the future?


----------



## FastEddy (2 Dec 2005)

newfie_chick said:
			
		

> okay i know i'm not army but what i am is a good friend of jenny....there is alot you don't know about her and i guess alot of you dont care.. she is a good person and take this from someone who has known her for a long long time . i just wanted to say something in her defense and to let her know all is good and i'll be here for her what ever comes from this ..cheers from nl



Yes I suppose the same could be put forward in the case of Charles Manson or any other infamous person.

As for her defense, she hasn't any, the only thing that comes to mind is, shes's either,

                           1. Shes very Stupid.

                           2. Shes very Horny.

                           3. Shes very Desperate.

                           4. Shes very embittered and wants to pay back every male she can for the tragic trick
                               played on her.

Regardless of what we would or should know of her past Life style or abuse can justify her actions, especially since, she of all persons knows the tragedy of being infected. So I would say she is all of the above four and deserves no consideration.


----------



## Burrows (2 Dec 2005)

If she was a nice person she would have the common decency to inform her sexual partner of her ailment.


----------



## midgetcop (2 Dec 2005)

newfie_chick said:
			
		

> okay i know i'm not army but what i am is a good friend of jenny....there is alot you don't know about her and i guess alot of you dont care.. she is a good person and take this from someone who has known her for a long long time . i just wanted to say something in her defense and to let her know all is good and i'll be here for her what ever comes from this ..cheers from nl



It doesn't really matter if she is (otherwise) a good person. It doesn't matter that we don't know anything else about her. What matters is the issue at hand. 

And all is *NOT* good. Someone's life has been significantly altered because of her complete lack of responsibility and judgement. 

HIV is a serious issue, and she threw it to the wind when she made the decision to sleep with a near-stranger without disclosing her condition. 

Regardless of anything else, she needs to pay for that.


----------



## pbi (6 Dec 2005)

newfie_chick said:
			
		

> okay i know i'm not army but what i am is a good friend of jenny....there is alot you don't know about her and i guess alot of you dont care.. she is a good person and take this from someone who has known her for a long long time . i just wanted to say something in her defense and to let her know all is good and i'll be here for her what ever comes from this ..cheers from nl



So...as a good friend you advised her not to act in this dangerous way, and you encouraged her to get both the psychological and medical treatment she needs, right?

Cheers


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Dec 2005)

> I'm not going to judge her for sleeping with a few people (even the same night) - but I will judge her for knowingly sleeping with people unprotected while she had HIV.



Well said.



> okay i know i'm not army but what i am is a good friend of jenny....there is alot you don't know about her and i guess alot of you dont care.. she is a good person and take this from someone who has known her for a long long time . i just wanted to say something in her defense and to let her know all is good and i'll be here for her what ever comes from this ..cheers from nl





> So...as a good friend you advised her not to act in this dangerous way, and you encouraged her to get both the psychological and medical treatment she needs, right?



If you, newfie_chick, did not try and help her with her problem OR especially  stop her from attempting to infect people with a deadly dieasese then YOU are not a good person and I'm being very polite in my wording.

Anyone who knew she had AIDS and stood by while she screwed people with it and said nothing are just as guilty and just as cowardly as she was and deserve a kick in the head.


----------



## combat_medic (7 Dec 2005)

If she had snuck into his house in the middle of the night and injected him with HIV-tainted blood without his knowledge, would you be less sympathetic to her? You shouldn't be, because it's pretty much the same thing. 

There was a case recently in the US about a lawyer who was accused (and recently convicted) of raping a 6 month old baby. The evidence that convicted him, in fact, was pictures and videotapes that he himself had taken of the assault. When interviewed, his friends and neighbours all talked about how nice of a guy he was. 

I don't care who you are, or what you have to say about the matter. Anyone who would knowingly and willingly inflict that kind of harm on another human being is not a good person, no matter what anyone has to say about them. This girl is the same. She's a malicious and dangerous criminal who has demonstrated that she has no regard for the lives and health of others, and deserves to serve a long sentence in prison. 

I wonder if you would be saying what a great person she is if it was you whom she infected.


----------



## Pte_Martin (7 Dec 2005)

combat_medic said:
			
		

> If she had snuck into his house in the middle of the night and injected him with HIV-tainted blood without his knowledge, would you be less sympathetic to her? You shouldn't be, because it's pretty much the same thing.
> 
> There was a case recently in the US about a lawyer who was accused (and recently convicted) of raping a 6 month old baby. The evidence that convicted him, in fact, was pictures and videotapes that he himself had taken of the assault. When interviewed, his friends and neighbours all talked about how nice of a guy he was.
> 
> ...



Nicely said


----------



## Fishbone Jones (7 Dec 2005)

Well, time to put this one away til something new develops.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Feb 2007)

HIV woman strikes again
Charged with having unprotected sex

By TRACY MCLAUGHLIN, SPECIAL TO THE SUN

An HIV-positive woman sentenced to house arrest in 2005 after she had sex with a Base Borden soldier without telling him she was infected has been charged with committing the same crime in Newfoundland, police confirmed yesterday. 
Jennifer Murphy, 33, was charged with aggravated sexual assault and one count of breach of probation after allegedly having sex with a man Dec. 16, 2006 in her home town of St. John's, Nfld. 
She was released and will be back in court April 12. 

"The allegations are that she had sex with an unknowing male and we have determined there is enough grounds to support the charges," said Const. Shawn O'Reilly, of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary in St. John's. 
"The victim came with his complaint to the police station," he added. 

Murphy made headlines across the country after she had sex with a soldier while she was at CFB Borden, a military base near Angus, Ont. 
A 22-year-old soldier testified at a preliminary hearing in June 2005 that he took Murphy to his barracks room where she asked him to have sex without a condom, telling him "she liked it better that way." 

He said she "stalked" him for days afterward with more offers of sex but he told her to leave him alone or he would call the military police to get a restraining order. 
When military police showed up at his door with the news of her HIV status, he broke down and cried, he testified. 

A civilian testified at the same preliminary hearing that Murphy performed unprotected oral sex on him four to five times in a parking lot, then at the barracks they had sexual intercourse with a condom that broke. 
Both men said they went for testing and were relieved when the tests were negative. 


While charges in the civilian case were withdrawn by the Crown, Murphy pleaded guilty in the case of the soldier and was sentenced to 12 months house arrest at her home in Newfoundland with three years of probation. While the Criminal Code provides a maximum sentence of life in prison for aggravated sexual assault, previous sentences have ranged from two to 14 years in jail. 

Major Rob Bell of the Canadian Military National Investigation Service (NIS) said he could not comment on the difference between Murphy's house arrest sentence and other prison sentences.


----------



## xo31@711ret (28 Feb 2007)

IMHO; good ol' arithmetic... strike 1 + strike 2 =  long jail time


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Feb 2007)

Maybe guys should take note of her name: JENNIFER MURPHY!  Unless she uses an alias??
I for one hope she gets a very long sentence, this amounts to attempted murder.


----------



## FastEddy (28 Feb 2007)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Maybe guys should take note of her name: JENNIFER MURPHY!  Unless she uses an alias??
> I for one hope she gets a very long sentence, this amounts to attempted murder.




Between our Courts, Politicians and the News Media, I sometime wonder how we survive.

These people should be declared Dangerous Sexual Offenders and have their Picture displayed where ever they go, if our Courts insist on letting them run around loose.

Even if she was a lifetime Friend, I'd avoid her like the plague. To sing her praise and to have knowledge of the facts, your just as guilty.

Cheers.


----------



## orange.paint (28 Feb 2007)

But come on guys,she's a really nice person. 

Maybe SOMEONE (not myself)could buy the black-out story.However after now two  attempts at killing someone,it's time to stop this creature spreading it's miasma across Canada.Somehow I don't think a man would get away with it quite as easy.


----------



## xo31@711ret (28 Feb 2007)

I'm looking forward to seeing what she gets as compared to the recent x CFL player....


----------



## formerarmybrat23 (28 Feb 2007)

im in full agreement with the majority of the posts here. This jennifer murphy is obviously a danger to herself and the public. Hopefully she is put in jail this time, and by doing so im sure many lives will be saved.

i can see how being handed this death sentence would make a girl angry and wanting to make others feel the same way. But although she may not be at fault for contracting it in the first place (how many ppl have had unprotected sex and luckly got nothing?) it is her responsibilty now to protect others from it. 

Sex does not have to be over, but it does have to be as safe as possible and she should inform partners of her status.  Random partners will ofcourse run for the hills, but surprisingly if someone loves you enough they may stay. Take for example magic johnson. HIV positive for over 15 years still having protected sex with only his wife who in all this time has not contracted the disease.

People just need to be safer but those who are infected and dont should be punished the same as murders. 25 to life. Because if u infect someone with this disease you might as well have killed them. ​


----------



## GIJAY (28 Feb 2007)

xo31@711ret said:
			
		

> I'm looking forward to seeing what she gets as compared to the recent x CFL player....




No kidding, he got 6 years for his assault. Wonder if being in the position he is (celebrity) they were trying to set a precendent?


----------



## Jacqueline (28 Feb 2007)

JasonH said:
			
		

> An HIV-positive woman from Newfoundland has pleaded guilty to an assault charge for having sex with a soldier at an Ontario military base.



The article doesn't actually say he was infected, maybe they used protection. All it says is that she had sex with him. 

She is still dangerous regardless.


----------



## GAP (28 Feb 2007)

Miss Jacqueline said:
			
		

> The article doesn't actually say he was infected, maybe they used protection. All it says is that she had sex with him.
> 
> She is still dangerous regardless.


If you REREAD the article you will noticed she asked him not to use protection.


----------



## Jacqueline (28 Feb 2007)

Oops didn't see that the first time around


----------



## orange.paint (28 Feb 2007)

Miss Jacqueline said:
			
		

> The article doesn't actually say he was infected, maybe they used protection. All it says is that she had sex with him.
> 
> She is still dangerous regardless.



Protected?
Aint this like standing down range at a SQN PWT2...on the mound with your helmet on?Sure you may not catch anything...


----------



## Gayson (28 Feb 2007)

Good news the two guys came up negative after testing.


----------



## formerarmybrat23 (28 Feb 2007)

thank goodness. I hope that they have learned a lesson there. It is surprising how many guys still dont use anything, you cant put your life in someone elses hands like that, and then be shocked when it turns out you have contracted something.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (15 Sep 2011)

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/09/14/hiv-infected-woman-faces-new-charges

BARRIE - An HIV-infected woman who became notorious after enticing CFB Borden soldiers to have sex with her in 2005 is back behind bars charged with a similar offence.

Jennifer Murphy, now 38, is charged with aggravated sexual assault after allegedly having unprotected sex with a man in a wooded area in Barrie.
Barrie police, fearing for public safety, sent out a media advisory with her photograph on Wednesday.
“We believe that Murphy has been in Barrie for over a month and may have had sexual contact with various people in the Barrie area,” Det.-Const. Troy Armstrong said.

Police are urging anyone who has had sexual contact with Murphy to seek medical advice and contact the Barrie Police Service.
In 2005, Murphy made national headlines after having sex with two men at Canadian Forces Base Borden, 12 km west of Barrie.
A 22-year-old soldier wept as he testified that he slept with her without knowing about her HIV status. He said he and another soldier found Murphy wandering through the barracks approaching soldiers to have sex with her, and he did.

The young soldier told how he lived in fear that he may end up with AIDS, although at the time, early tests came up negative.
Others in the barracks told stories of how Murphy wandered the halls wearing a pink thong and asking the soldiers to party. But once the charges made the headlines, soldiers were ordered not to speak with the media.

Murphy pled guilty to one count of sexual assault in 2005. She was sentenced to 12 months of house arrest and ordered to go back to her home in Newfoundland.
But days after her sentence ended, she was arrested again in Newfoundland and charged with aggravated sexual assault after allegedly having sex with a man there. The charges were later dropped.

In this most recent incident, Murphy allegedly had sex in a wooded area at Milligan’s Pond with a man who was unaware of her HIV status.
The petite brunette looked worn as she made a brief appearance in handcuffs in bail court Wednesday. Her case was adjourned and she will be back in court Sept. 21.


----------



## Scott (15 Sep 2011)

xo31@711ret said:
			
		

> IMHO; good ol' arithmetic... strike 1 + strike 2 =  long jail time



Obviously not.

I hope she gets the book thrown at her (finally) and does a LONG time away from society.


----------



## Occam (15 Sep 2011)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> The petite brunette looked worn as she made a brief appearance in handcuffs in bail court Wednesday.



Sometimes, the jokes just write themselves.

Hope she goes away for a very, very long time.


----------



## Journeyman (15 Sep 2011)

Just so you know, for when you're bar-hopping in Nfld   






Jennifer Murphy


----------



## lethalLemon (15 Sep 2011)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Just so you know, for when you're bar-hopping in Nfld
> 
> 
> 
> ...



[joke mode on]

I'm guessing that person(s) were inebriated at time of "engaging the enemy"  

[/joke mode off]

In seriousness, what she did is criminal I truly feel for the victims. I hope that none of them contracted anything, I really hope.


----------



## darkskye (15 Sep 2011)

Toss her in jail and throw away the key. She's ruining their lives!


----------



## Infanteer (15 Sep 2011)

Sounds like a dangerous offender?


----------



## Pieman (15 Sep 2011)

Even if this woman did not have AIDS, her behavior is not mentally healthy. 

Pretty sure that any shrink will tell us that woman going around having sex with men in this manner has some pretty serious psychological problems.  Perhaps Bipolar with symptom of hypersexuality (can't get enough, does not matter who/where/when) 

Perhaps the long term solution for her is psychological treatment, aside from the treatment for AIDS. Not saying she does not deserve punishment, but that is a band aid solution. She can go to prison and give aids to someone there too)


----------



## Journeyman (16 Sep 2011)

Pieman said:
			
		

> Even if this woman did not have AIDS, her behavior is not mentally healthy.
> 
> Pretty sure that any shrink will tell us that woman going around having sex with men in this manner has some pretty serious psychological problems.


OK, let me pre-emptively say that I'm probably regretting this, and I'm not defending her personally whatsoever, but.....


....you've discounted the health (HIV/AIDS) issue, so "in this manner" means promiscuously ("with this disease" rather than "in this manner" would mean "with HIV").  

By "in this manner," are you suggesting that a legally-aged, not bound by religious-sanction [ie- your church/faith says you can't] male or female who has sex with more than one person, of the same species, who are equally free and psychologically competent to choose, within a non-specified time period, has "some pretty serious psychological problems"?

Without resort to pressing, waterboarding, or even public shaming, I confess. Once...at band camp (I was young).....I had sexual relations with more than one girl (all other conditions above apply) within a fortnight [go on; I'll wait while you google that].


Seriously, I'm not personally confessing or denying any potential "psychological problems".....but I don't think that it applies to the argument you are making. In fact, I'm even going to go out on a limb and suggest that maybe you need to get laid.



Have a look at her pic again before you go though, just in case you're in her bar.


----------



## Container (16 Sep 2011)

.....


You dont see a difference between having multiple partners+liking disco stick and wandering around the shacks in a pink thong asking random strangers for sex?


----------



## Journeyman (16 Sep 2011)

Container said:
			
		

> You dont see a difference between having multiple partners+liking disco stick and wandering around the shacks in a pink thong asking random strangers for sex?


Apparently I lacked the prurient interest to read in sufficient detail.


----------



## Container (16 Sep 2011)

Not me. I read in detail given the locale.....and thought maybe I knew her.......then I got to the picture and was like "phhhhheeeeewwww"

 ;D

*shoot I blew the punchline- I should have been like-

"Then I got to the picture and I was like 'Mom?'" *


----------



## Pieman (16 Sep 2011)

> Apparently I lacked the prurient interest to read in sufficient detail.


So it would seem.


----------



## kratz (1 Jun 2012)

An update to this necro-thread.

Shared from the Barrie Examiner



> Warrant issued for HIV woman
> 
> 
> By STAFF
> ...


----------



## LineJumper (1 Jun 2012)

Great! More potential victims. I hope local media is informing the public.


----------



## kratz (10 Aug 2012)

ref: Barrie Examiner

The media is doing a good job informing the public that she got a second chance and has blown the 2nd opportunity off, again.



> Judge gives Murphy a second chance; strict bail conditions remain
> By Tracy McLaughlin, Special to QMI AGENCY
> Thursday, August 9, 2012 7:38:43 EDT PM
> 
> ...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Aug 2012)

kratz said:
			
		

> The media is doing a good job informing the public that she got a second chance and has blown the 2nd opportunity off, again.



Wording is _so_ important sometimes...

Hope the put her away this time.


----------



## kratz (31 Aug 2022)

1. CTV.ca: Former Barrie , Ont. woman's conviction for HIV non-disclosure overturned,.Aug 30, 2022
2. . CTV.ca: Jennifer Murphy sentenced to two years in jail., Sept 20, 2013
3. CBC.ca: Woman under house arrest unhappy with treatment, Dec 15, 2005

This is the same individual over the past 17 years. At the bottom of this week's article:



> "Nobody goes out and maliciously tries to pass it on. We need to do better, and I think Canada can do better," he concluded.



In separate chargers, 2005:



> In 2005, Murphy was convicted of the same charge and sentenced to 12 months house arrest after having unprotected sex with a soldier from CFB Borden and not telling him she was HIV positive.


----------



## Weinie (31 Aug 2022)

kratz said:


> 1. CTV.ca: Former Barrie , Ont. woman's conviction for HIV non-disclosure overturned,.Aug 30, 2022
> 2. . CTV.ca: Jennifer Murphy sentenced to two years in jail., Sept 20, 2013
> 3. CBC.ca: Woman under house arrest unhappy with treatment, Dec 15, 2005
> 
> ...


From the article.

"My children don't know a world where there hasn't been HIV or AIDS in the world, and they don't need to see people go to jail because they have a *hidden disability,"* Clarke said.


OMFG.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (31 Aug 2022)

This “PC wording” trend has gone way to far.  Way to far.  Disability ffs.


----------



## brihard (31 Aug 2022)

What’s the issue with the term “invisible disability”? It’s a perfectly apt description for a number of different medical conditions that can be profoundly disabling but aren’t readily apparent to someone looking and seeing.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (31 Aug 2022)

The Ontario Court of Appeal decision



			R. v. Murphy, 2022 ONCA 615
		


The pedantics of "disability" aside, I wonder how the recent Supreme Court ruling "*that when someone is required by their partner to wear a condom during sex but they do not, they could be guilty of sexual assault"* should/could change the way that a similar case be interpreted.

The case in brief:





						Supreme Court of Canada - 39287
					






					www.scc-csc.ca
				




And the full decision





						R. v. Kirkpatrick - SCC Cases
					

This page contains a form to search the Supreme Court of Canada case information database. You can search by the SCC 5-digit case number, by name or word in the style of cause, or by file number from the appeal court.




					decisions.scc-csc.ca
				





edited to add

For completeness, the single 2013 conviction that was overturned by this appeal can be found here



			https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2013/2013canlii54139/2013canlii54139.html


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2022)

brihard said:


> What’s the issue with the term “invisible disability”? It’s a perfectly apt description for a number of different medical conditions that can be profoundly disabling but aren’t readily apparent to someone looking and seeing.


My guess is that while your probably technically correct the context it's used here is that she's some how the victim and we should take pity on her.


----------

