22yo Missouri student exposed 30+ partners to HIV and filmed it

[njverscumdump]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rachelzarrell/hiv-positive-student-filmed-secret-sex-tapes

Interesting story. Part of this may have been mentioned on here earlier, but the tapes are a new development. This guy was a wrestler at a Missouri college, a poz barebacker, and filmed his encounters with more than 30 partners. The reporting is lacking a bit: no mention of whether or not he was on meds or whether there were any female partners. It seems like in two of the recordings, he told his partners he didn't have any diseases, which I suppose is evidence that he concealed his status. So far, a total of five men have come forward, but only one has tested positive, as far as I can tell from the article.

My biggest question is, how did he get this many hookups from Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram???

[Ginkgink]

Cos when you're a young, ripped, hot black guy with a (probable) huge cock...you can get anyone lol

[firefighter]

Sounds like a guy on a last crusade .. because he fucked himself in the process by not revealing his status

[highlife]

Were his sexual in counters with guys, girls or both?

[whoai]

Yeah, if you look like him, it's probably not too hard to find partners on Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. More pics: http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2013/10/lindenwood_wrestler_accused_of_tiger_johnson_mandingo.php

Oh, and PS - it looks like he was gay (his facebook profile says interested in men) so I assume the partners were mostly male.

Edited January 20, 2014 by whoai

[bearbandit]

The article doesn't mention whether he was on meds at the time, or what his viral load was. Rather than leaping straight to legal proceedings, wouldn't a psychological evaluation first be a good idea? It's possible he has a psychological condition whereby he doesn't actually realise the danger of what he's doing, in which case treatment of the condition is a much smarter idea than prosecution.

I wonder especially because he filmed so much sex: if he had a concept that he was doing something wrong, why keep the damning evidence of the videos? If I lived in Missouri I sure as hell wouldn't video myself having sex with anyone, given Missouri's less than progressive approach to HIV.

It could be that he did what he did with full knowledge of what he was doing, but we don't know that. This is trial by news media and demonisation of people with HIV.

[TigerMilner]

Wow, none of the potential "victims" have any responsibility for their own actions? Unless he raped them on video, all he really should be prosecuted for is filming someone without their knowledge. And i'm not even sure that is a crime if you don't show it. It said they were "found". Not released. Sure, he is an ass hole for lying about it, if he even knew. They didn't say he actually knew himself. I hate these kinds of stories. Criminalizing HIV only makes people not want to get tested. Afterall, spreading it unknowingly is not a crime. Once you know, it all changes. This is wrong.

Also, there are no mentions of whether or not he was on meds because most people don't know to ask that or that it even matters. I didn't know these things until I was positive and it was my reality. Some straight reporter who is looking for a sensational story probably doesn't know that being on meds makes you unable to infect, or what undetectable means.

But, hey, he is HOT as fuck. I'll bet a lot of those 30 have some amazingly hot memories of that night. If they are like me, they will probably say it was worth it. Mine came from a very similar situation and from a guy who was hot, black and didn't know he had just gotten it. I can't possibly blame him. I went for the raw cock, took his load, and am living with it. And I'd do it all over again. In fact, I have done it again. So sue me.

[BiAggieGuy]

I'd go down on him in a second, but I also believe in being honest about one's status.

If someone knows they are positive, and intentionally deceives someone into thinking they are negative, it is wrong. If the other person does not ask, it is their own fault.

[GreenChaser]

If someone knows they are positive, and intentionally deceives someone into thinking they are negative, it is wrong. If the other person does not ask, it is their own fault.

well said. if he knew beforehand which to my recollection he did, then he deserves whatever the law is going to deal him. if he didn't know, then there is a margin for debate. if he btms just simply never asked, then they should be responsible for their owne decisions.

[NuttinmyButt]

Being a negative bottom I'm gonna take a different position. It depends what they asked. If they asked are you clean, then why shouldn't he say yes.

To me, they were playing with fire. If you don't wanna poz, reduce your risk by never barebacking.

[fillmyholeftl]

I would take LOAD AFTER LOAD from him & gladly be video taped. The issue however is what the laws are, not what we think is fair. In a lot of states (& I am not saying I agree) it is ILLEGAL/CRIMINAL to expose (not infect) someone to the HIV virus. SO if he knew, whether or not the bottoms asked, he is at fault according to THE LAW. Again, doesn't matter if we all agree that at least some responsibility lays with the bottom.

[pozpig]

Tiger, I wholeheartedly agree with your first question regarding victim responsibility. In this country, and every other one that I'm aware of, there is a sense of responsibility for ones own actions, even if those actions, or lack of are personally damaging. I will admit I'm guilty of not disclosing my status to every one of my partners as I'm sure there are others as well, most frequently went visiting a sex club or other similar venue. I do however answer truthfully when asked and feel that in such situations I believe it best to always assume your partner(s) are poz, and if you aren't and don't want the risk you should either not be there, or take every damn preventive measure to ensure you don't come home with a souvineir.

I think disclosure laws are appropriate to have, but I also feel that laws for victims should also be required such as not able to call "foul" if the "victim" didn't ask, but later finds out. Why does the law need to side with only one side, in this case, the victim when it should be shared responsibility with all involved. If the victim is going to engage in activites that potentially put them at risk, why should they be free and clear to do so, and when something happens based on their own actions, it's all about "poor me".

[NuttinmyButt]

Pozpig, I absolutely agree. Bottoms should be held partly accountable. If they allow a bare dick up their hole they know the risk. I know it will eventually happen to me, but I am not going to point a finger and yell "poor me". Like any other responsible adult I know what the risks are. I know that there are stealth guys out there (side point, for myself I can't decide if I like it better when I don't know or when I know I am taking a Poz load) and everyone knows it.

To my understanding it wasn't rape, it was consensual sex. When you consent to something, you either know what you are doing or you take responsibility for the consequences

[wayneuk]

They can send him over here to me as I would happily have that hot guy forever

[Deaner]

A big part of me wonders why it is still criminalized to spread HIV which is so easily manageable, while much of the recent daily news is focused on the spread of deadly flu viruses, lethal food poisons, and myriads of life-threatening situations ranging from guns to cars to lethargic lifestyles and horrible eating habits.

Getting a bitch pregnant might cost you a lifetime of child support, but how different is it from passing on a virus between two people who should know better?

I'd really encourage anyone who is able to make their voice known if they feel HIV should be de-criminalized.