Est.2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

The Tragedy Of An HIV-positive International Singer And Allegations Of Unprotected Sex Transmission

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

CONTACT THE BLOGMASTER ONLY

Submitted by Yardbroom

“I am sorry from the bottom of my heart.  No way did I want my partner to be infected.”

Nadja_Benaissa
Nadja Benaissa

The above statement read in court on behalf of the accused, sums up the predicament of the beautiful international singer Nadja Benaissa of the German pop band No Angels.  Who is charged with grievous bodily harm and attempted aggravated assault. Under German law failing to disclose being HIV-positive before having unprotected sex is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.  The tariff can be extended to life if the person goes on to die of AIDS.

The allegations are that Nadja Benaissa had unprotected sex with a 34 year old male partner – unidentified because of court procedure – knowing that she was HIV-positive and did not inform him. In a highly charged moment the unidentified male addressed the accused and said:  “You have unleashed a lot of misery into the world.”

The female No Angels group has sold over 5 million records and is one of Germany’s most successful and idolised bands.

The manner of Benaissa’s arrest did not sit easily with the German campaigners for the victims of HIV/AIDS.  She was arrested in April 2009 in the full glare of publicity, just before she was due to appear on stage in Frankfurt; handcuffed, she was then taken into custody by plain-clothes police as fans watched in amazement, then to be detained in custody for 10 days.

Away from the sway of politics, and there always is in these issues.  The law is there to protect the innocent, it is incumbent on those who “know” they are HIV-positive to inform partners of their condition.  It gives partners the knowledge to make an informed decision.  Either to walk away, have protected sex, or take the chance in full knowledge of the possible outcome.

Benaissa’s defence is that she was advised that it was highly unlikely that she could transfer the virus to anyone with whom she had sex.  Of course the law as I understand it states you “should” inform your partner, if you are HIV-positive.

The arguments will no doubt roll and various positions taken long after the verdict, which is due on 26th August 2010.  Whatever the outcome, for these are “allegations” the words of that unidentified male in a German court will have a resonance with many:

“You have unleashed a lot of misery into the world.”

For therein lies the dangers of unprotected sex with partners of whose veracity you are not quite sure;  are there lessons here.  Those who are sexually active owe it to everyone to be careful with how they deal with their sexuality.  Fame, celebrity, status and position are no protector in that intoxicating height, from which we can be brought crashing into the depths of despair.

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

41 responses to “The Tragedy Of An HIV-positive International Singer And Allegations Of Unprotected Sex Transmission”

  1. jeff cumberbatch Avatar
    jeff cumberbatch

    Is a person who, in this day and age, engages in unprotected sex with a person of whose HIV status he/she or she is unaware or unsure properly described as “innocent”? Would not “reckless” fit the bill better? Why is the person living with HIV solely to blame?

  2. BAFBFP Avatar
    BAFBFP

    Man from East have dilemma … nice female, very very nice … If citizen complete grievous act without consent and receive ailment, look at it, he receive seven year and she receive seven year, so for sake of saving tax dollar nobody go to jail … no? I have idea Jeff …

  3. Brutus Avatar
    Brutus

    @Jeff Cumberbatch,

    A person’s HIV status can change overnight. Wouldn’t you need to have periodic testing throughout the relationship to be absolutely certain of your partner’s status? Is this what you are suggesting?

  4. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    de likkers Jeff de likkers. Most people can be reckless when duh got up duh likkers.

    I hope my BU friends are careful.

  5. David Avatar
    David

    Is this the same Jeff who exhibited a laissez faire attitude towards our very* young who were captured engaged in dry sex a couple days ago?

    You can’t have your cake and eat it Jeff.

  6. Bosun Avatar
    Bosun

    @Hants,don’t go blaming the likker now, the liquid one I assume you meant. When many men ,cold sober ,see a good bit of stuff, they tend go into the Wild West Mode. Shoot first and ask questions later,….. like Doc what is it?
    If AIDS were knocking around a bit earlier, there would have been a population implosion.

  7. BAFBFP Avatar
    BAFBFP

    Earth calling Hants, Earth calling Hants, there is no BU friend. I repeat, There is NO BU friend … Do you copy … overt..! hic!

  8. BAFBFP Avatar
    BAFBFP

    Maybe girl realise that tool be charge before apply condom … no? So after first few time that be problem ..no? Maybe time to invent condom that fit to tool before tool charge … no? Then girl insist on condom on soft tool and not have to say nasty four letter word (AIDS) … no?

  9. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    ok BAFBFP, BU friend or foe, I still want de brethren to be careful.

  10. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    @ Jeff Cumberbatch
    You wrote: “Is a person who, in this day and age, engages in unprotected sex with a person of whose HIV status he /she is unaware or unsure properly described as “innocent”? Would not “reckless” fit the bill better? Why is the person living with HIV solely to blame?”
    *********************************************
    Hi Jeff
    I have used “innocent” here in the context of being, “not tainted with evil, pure”.

    Inherent in the submission is the “tragedy” for both participants.

    As to if he was “reckless” meaning: Having or showing no regard for danger or consequences. That would suppose that he knew or should have known of the danger before the act and the likely consequences. Since she she did not inform him she was Hiv-positive. I believe he was unlikely to know.
    We should also remember she was required by “German Law”to inform partners she was Hiv-positive.

    As to your comment “in this day and age” I concur, hence the moral being all of us must be constantly aware of the dangers of unprotected sex with partners whose veracity is unknown.

  11. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    Jeff has a point. Circumstances look like contributory negligence.

    Anyone who has unproected sex nowadays must know there is a risk.

    Does the potential partner have a fiduciary dty per se? Maybe if they were a ‘committed’ spouse, not otherwise.

    If a young man goes to a bar, sees the sweetest thing in years and makes a try, she agrees, even if she denies having any sexually transmitted disease and afterwards he has symptoms, surely he knew the risks?

    What do the ads say, ‘protect your wicket’?

    If X travels to say, Pakistan, contracts cholera (I think this is easily communicable, no?), returns and walks through Bridgetown, can X be charged with attempted mass murder?

    From a moral and natural justice standpoint, the singer should have disclosed her illness., if she knew of it.

    However, his outburst that is claimed, is an emotional tirade, from a man who ‘took his pants down’. She did not release misery on the world, what an idiot. She maybe gave him some misery, and he contributed.

    I am a man and I know that if I go into a bar and chase the pretty thing, I am exposing myself to something, no matter what she says.

    After all, the fellow was 34 years, not 17 years old. He should have known better.

    If ya cant keep your manhood in your pants, that is your problem.

    Now, if they had agreed to have tests and then consummate without the ‘wall’ of a condom, and she denied the test result…..that is another matter. It removes any element of contribution on his part.

    Sorry, but if I were single and bar-hopping, aint nothing without a condom, no matter how sweet she is.

  12. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    By the way, the fellow was annoyed that he got aids.

    What about the other scenario, if she had got pregnant?

    Would he have denied any responsibility for that too?

    Idiot.

  13. David Avatar
    David

    @Crusoe

    Understand you point, the man’s behaviour was ‘reckless’ and many will say amoral.

    The law is the law i.e. the man should have been told.

    In this case to compare a scenario of being pregnant to this one is off. HIV is a life threatening disease, a duty of care takes on greater importance from the partner who has the knowledge. While it is commonsense practice there should have been protected sex some people may operate on trust. What about those people who it is said the animal man assumes control?

  14. Rosemary Parkinson Avatar
    Rosemary Parkinson

    Unprotected sex no matter how gorgeous the man/woman is or how squeeky clean they look…is plain stuped. And I doubt there are too many out there who at one point or another did not do this, then worry a bit after! Even go for a test to ensure that all is well.

    Nobody should have to have I HAVE AIDS, HERPES, SORES OF A DIFFERENT KIND, BLISTERS AWAY or whatever tattoed on their forehead…but it is a difficult situation to deal with… Man/woman comes on to you, he looking good, maybe too much to drink perhaps, nexx ting all sex lets loose…condom just does not come into the action at the time…I would say both people are guilty at this point…

    Personally I think Parliament should add having sex on their list of bans that carry heavy penalties like death by hanging… They seem so intent on placing all kind of banning on the people of this country.

    Now that would save some health care dollars….no more sexually transmittable diseases…no more babies….wow! the mind boggles at how much money the whole country will save. The QEH could even be rebuilt as a state of the art institution… And think of all the exercise hands will get!! What a health plus!

    Oh! And after reading the one-page ad/information on Kissing and all its implications….ban dat too!!

  15. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    @ David,
    I do not understand your comment @10:06 pm. What does engaging in “dry sex”, as you call it; (to me they were merely mimicking adults on Kadooment Day) have to do with contracting HIV through unprotected sexual intercourse?

    @ Yardbroom,
    He would not have to know she was HIV+ to be “reckless”. As I submitted, the principle of “universal precaution” requires one to treat every sexual partner as HIV+ unless one is certain as to the contrary. One should not wait to be told; that is like playing dice with death!

    I am of course aware that the law punished non-disclosure of HIV+ status, but is this the best method of reducing the spread of the disease? Does it place any responsibility on the uninfected partner to be responsible for his/her sexual health? To get tested? To not be promiscuous?

  16. Sargeant Avatar
    Sargeant

    Sexual transmission of diseases have always been among us but in the hysteria after HIV/IDS surfaced many Gov’s either enacted laws or tweaked regulations on their books which effectively punished those afflicted with these ailments. That punishment sought to penalise those who engaged in sexual relations if they didn’t inform their partners of their condition.

    I don’t see anyone being prosecuted for not informing their partners that they have herpes; gonorrhea or any of the other infectious diseases that can be contracted during sexual intercourse. I don’t see anyone with the disease being prosecuted if they shared needles during drug binges.

    Most sexual activity is carried out between consulting adults and both should be equally responsible for their conduct, perhaps the lass was applying her version of “Don’t ask, don’t tell”.

    I have zero empathy for the man he is the author of his own “misery” , In this day of “Booty Calls”; One Night stands and bar “hookups” every one should be mindful of that old Bajan adage “Wah sweeten goat mout does burn e …..”

  17. Bonny Peppa Avatar
    Bonny Peppa

    Crusoe
    I agree wid you. He’s responsible for his own destiny.
    And as one a my wutless brothas would say, ‘if dis is wah AIDS look like, gimme allllllllllllllllll”. (wuhlosssssss)

    Hants
    de likkers, de likkersssss (hiccupp)

  18. kiki Avatar
    kiki

    Attraction or Repulsion: A Matter of Individual Taste? —
    amoeboid locomotion …. However these forces can produce net repulsion or attraction effects …
    ♂ MALE SIGN is attracted to the ♀ FEMALE SIGN

  19. David Avatar
    David

    @Jeff

    Not to bother, was meant as a tease.

  20. BAFBFP Avatar
    BAFBFP

    Crusoe

    How could man prove that said woman that cause problem, particularly when man master art of pickup girl in bar activity…?

  21. BAFBFP Avatar
    BAFBFP

    Rosemary Parkinson we from East have problem for keep condom on …. Condom very big for very small small island … We from East need special condom … no? We very safe sex people neverless … not enough woman to go around … So very appreciative of what pass our way … Any plans ..?

  22. Andy Avatar
    Andy

    I take it that we all, men and women, have had sex before and know how it works. Yet we sit down and write crap trying to make others feel that we are better than they are. We have been lucky so far. That man and the woman as well were not so luck. Sympathy is required. After all, you could be next.

  23. Fence Sitter Avatar
    Fence Sitter

    BTW, a correction (if the Internet is to be believed) – the group is called NO Angels. Good thing the group wasn’t called Axe Murderers…..

  24. EyeSee Avatar
    EyeSee

    This incident occurred in 2004 and must be considered in terms of time and space. Today, more funds are spent on programmes that advise the public to ‘wrap it up’ and protect his/her health.

    This woman knew she was HIV positive and ought to have informed the partner or insisted on the use of protection. She knowingly passed on a virus that could lead to death, and she cannot go unpunished for that act.

  25. Bosun Avatar
    Bosun

    STD ,not including AIDS,is still very much prevalent in the society,and this should be a cause for concern. These Claps, and Bores and a -gonner-here,are treatable,but are more or less, “gateway poxes”

  26. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    @ Jeff Cumberbatch
    It is true that one of the best ways of preventing the spread of Hiv Aids, is for “all” men to protect themselves before sex -wearing condoms – because all casual sexual encounters are potentially dangerous…that is an absolute position.

    However, life being what it is that level of responsibility will not happen, as has been shown over many decades in other “areas” with the amount of unwanted pregnantcies.

    The fall back position is for all those who are Hiv-positive, male/female and sexually active to be obliged -under legal sanction – to inform their partners before sex. This in tandem with accepting that all “casual” sexual relationships have an inherent dangerous component and men should wear condoms; is the best way of preventing the spread of Hiv Aids, to which you have alluded.

  27. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    @Andy, no one is saying that we are better, but that the fellow should accept some of the blame and not try to place it all on the girl. That is all.

    Then going into dramatics and blaming her for ‘unleashing misery on the world’? WFT?

    He took a chance, it blew. Done.

    @Yardbroom, so what of those who have no idea that they have HIV? Or if we are excusing responsibility then those who are ‘afraid’ to let their condition be known, not wanting to be an outcast?

    That said, BAF has a great point, how does he knw that he contracted HIV from this girl, it could have been anyone, even if she is HIV positive, he may have contracted it from someone else.

    And I do remind, that he is 34 years old, not a teenager, without experience and knowledge, nor hormones banging the stable door.

  28. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    @ Crusoe
    Quote:
    “@ Yardbroom, so what of those who have no idea that they have HIV? Or if we are excusing responsibility then those who are “afraid” to let their condition be known not wanting to be an outcast?
    ***********************************
    If someone does not know they are Hiv-positive, that does not present a problem, as the law in Germany – where this case is being tried – is that those who “know” they are Hiv-positive should inform their sexual partners or be subjected to legal sanction.

    As to those who are afraid of being an outcast. This is an ethical question, is ones personal position greater than that of the larger community who could be placed at risk…I will leave that for individuals to decide.

    As to this specific case I will not take a condemnatory position against the persons concerned; I see it as a “tragedy”- regardless of the outcome – there will be no winners here.

  29. victor Avatar
    victor

    Ask among your friends “would you wear a condom?” You will find the answer is “NO”. It’s seen as some kind of a turn off, somehow demeaning. That’s the issue that needs to be resolved. The attitude “I don’t use condoms” is a kind of bravado that has caused HIV to boom.

  30. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    Hi Victor
    In abstract terms “bravado” does play a part but in reality. The question to be asked is not would you wear a condom?
    But
    Would you NOT wear a condom if you “knew” a partner was Hiv-positive?
    In that situation “most” men would not bother with that sexual encounter however beautiful the partner was; if a condom was not worn.

  31. David Avatar
    David

    @Yardbroom

    It may seem pedantic but safe sex is defined as no sex by some. There is the inherent risk associated with wearing a condom.

  32. Crusoe Avatar
    Crusoe

    @Yardbroom,

    I understand your position. I too think it a tragedy, I too will not condemn the persons concerned for contracting HIV.

    But as I said, I do take issue with such a case where one partner does not accept some of the responsibility.

    After all, we are taking others to task with not accepting responsibility i.e. politicians, parents, Hospital administration, drivers etc etc….

  33. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    @ David
    …”but safe sex is defined as no sex by some”.
    True.
    However, virile fit sexually active single people – and some not single – will NOT abstain from sex, that is a reality.

    “There is an inherent risk associated with wearing a condom”.
    True.
    But there is a greater risk with NOT wearing a condom; given that people will have sex.
    @ Crusoe
    Quote: ” But as I said, I do take issue with such a case where one partner does not accept some of the resposibility” No one can disagree with your above statement, as that is a common sense approach.
    If males and females can work “together” for the common good of themselves and society – without a blame culture – society will be better placed to fight HIV/Aids.

  34. David Avatar
    David

    Suppose the man had worn a condom and the girl had said nothing of her condition yet he contracted the virus?

  35. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    @ David
    “Suppose the man had worn a condom and the girl had said nothing yet he contracted the virus?”
    I believe the manufacturers of condoms give about a 98% security for their product – this is from memory it could be wrong – he would have been unlucky.
    In life the only thing 100% certain is death, we therefore take all the precautions reasonably possible and hope that others will do the same in good faith…sometimes the Law is necessary as an incentive for those positions.
    I see the angle of your question, would she be guilty as charged. There is a principle in common law: ” the deed does not make a man guilty unless his mind be guilty” The young lady did state : “I am sorry from the bottom of my heart. No way did I want my partner to be infected”.
    It can be said “if the mental element of any conduct alleged to be a crime is proved to be absent in any given case, the crime so defined is not committed; or, again, if a crime is fully defined nothing amounts to that crime which does not satisfy that definition.”
    The best definition of “Mens rea”: “Intention, knowledge or recklessness with respect to all the elements of the offence together with any ulterior intent which the definition of the crime requires.”
    The questions to be asked:
    Did she know she was Hiv-Positive?
    Did she know she was required by Law to convey that information to her sexual partners.
    Was she told of the possibility of transmission of Hiv/Aids.
    I make no judgement.

  36. VioLenT_ShaFF Avatar
    VioLenT_ShaFF

    lock the biatch up and throw away the key!
    Anyone that willingly passes on that shit should suffer 10 times more than the poor fool that took the risk!
    Are you people forgetting that people are excellent liars and some people realise after months/years that their partners gave them aids/hiv?
    Husbands and wives make foolish mistakes and stray,mostly with people that they trust as well,should a man/woman be sentenced to death for trusting in somone?Condoms arn’t even 100 percent,so even if a man or woman was safe and still contracted it what would you fools say?
    I can have sympathy if she was unaware and i am sorry for anyone that had that god forsaken illlness,but the demon knew!
    I feel sorry for the brother that contracted the virus from her,but at least they stopped the devil from taking more souls.

  37. David Avatar
    David

    @Yardbroom

    Saw in the Nation today this story being taken from AFP feed.

    Your perspective on the incident provided a better insight for the BU family.

    Thank you.

  38. jeff cumberbatch Avatar
    jeff cumberbatch

    If the man had worn a condom and still contracted HIV, the woman would not have been any more or less guilty of the offence as charged. But think what this would mean for sexual relations between people in general. No one would be safe anymore….even if you asked! The condom does not give a guarantee, merely an assurance beyond reasonable doubt.

  39. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    The only 100% safe sex is No Sex. Sex with a condom is probably 99% safe and is still the best option if you choose to have sex.

    An HIV infected person who does not inform their sex partner of their disease deserves some time in jail because it is likely either a callous disregard for the other person or a deliberate attempt to infect the other person.

  40. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    @ David/BU
    Thanks

  41. David Avatar
    David

    Nadja gets two years suspended sentence.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading