The Widespread Ignorance of Charging HIV Positive People with Terrorism

There's a prosecutor in Michigan who has a bone to pick with HIV positive people. He's not only working hard to foster current stigma about HIV, he's taking things one step further: he's charging an HIV positive person who got into a fist fight with bioterrorism.

The case revolves around Daniel Allen, a 40-something Michigan resident in Macomb County. In 2009, Allen was involved in a physical altercation with his neighbor, after the neighbor allegedly taunted Allen with anti-gay slurs. Fists, kicks, arms and legs started to fly, and by the end of the altercation, Allen had bit his neighbor on the lip. Fights sometimes do get a little dirty, after all.

Police came, and later took Allen down to the station where he was charged with assault. But then the county prosecutor, Eric Smith, decided to do something pretty brazen. After watching a local Fox News report where it was revealed that Daniel Allen was HIV positive, Prosecutor Smith decided to dig up a Michigan law passed in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombings, and charge Daniel Allen with bioterrorism.

That's right, getting into a fight with your neighbor is akin to blowing up a federal building. At least if you're HIV positive.

The case has received widespread attention, with many activists calling the decision by Smith to seek bioterrorism charges ludicrous. Over 1,000 people have sent letters to Prosecutor Smith urging him to drop the case. And while Smith continues to come under extreme criticism for his handling of the case, he still hasn't budged.

That's why four groups filed an amicus brief yesterday in Allen's case, urging the judge to toss Smith's bioterrorism charge out the door. The groups, which include the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and three Michigan-based groups that work on HIV advocacy, said in their brief that Prosecutor Smith is showing widespread ignorance by charging Daniel Allen with bioterrorism. And that ignorance could come at a heavy cost, as it could very well increase stigma about HIV in ways that just aren't scientifically sound.

"Despite such public education efforts, ignorance about how HIV is and is not transmitted is still widespread in this country," the groups write in their brief. "People who incorrectly believed that certain activities posed a risk for HIV transmission were likely to say they would be uncomfortable working with someone who has HIV or with having their food prepared by someone with HIV."

Then the brief nails it out of the park by calling Prosecutor Smith out on his very bad science. The brief spells out in no uncertain circumstances that it's impossible to transmit HIV via biting. There's no scientific evidence to show that it can be transmitted via biting, no documented cases (that aren't suspect to a huge dose of skepticism), and no medical professional willing to say conclusively that biting someone can give them HIV.

In short, the entire justification for Prosecutor Smith's charge is based on a faulty premise. The algebra equation looks something like this: Bad lawyer + bad application of an ill-defined law = injustice.

Daniel Allen's case moves forward next week with its first hearing. If you haven't called on Prosecutor Smith to drop the HIV-as-terrorism charge on Allen, do so now. Send the message that people living with HIV aren't ticking time bombs of terrorism, and shouldn't be treated that way by any lawyer, anywhere in the country.

Photo credit: gernhaex