Florida pastor accused of having sex with teen, not disclosing HIV status

[RoosterDance]

YouTube Link

A pastor, age 42, was found having sex with a 14 year old boy. The Florida police went on to make this big presentation about it. First they explained how he had a long successful career working in the school system, and later as a pastor, then go on to say that it was all a deception! His true goal all along was diddling kids, and everything he's ever done was a means to that end. They go on to use such subjective statements as "He is an evil man!" and "Jesus don't like that!" and "Pedophiles will never change!". Complicating the issue however is the fact that the pastor was HIV positive, and did not disclose this to the boy he was with.

Aside from the HIV part, I suppose none of this is terribly unusual, though it is lamentable that this has become the usual. Though the question I want to focus on is why this big and very public presentation about it? Why does this seem to be the only crime that warrants such things?

[Scorchingwilde]

The fact that the very real public health angle is secondary to the scandal of having sex with a 14 y/o tells me all I need to know about how much the media actually cares about that teen boy. What a load of horse dung.

[Jim Burton]

His serostatus is unimportant, though they are using "HIV Positive" wrongly as a proxy for someone who is accused of actively and deliberately spreading HIV. To do this, he would have ceased his drug treatment, making him infectious and therefore able to spread. An HIV positive person on treatment does not need to inform their partner of their status, although legally, some places demand this because of outdated lawmaking.

This unscientific and sensational use of language seems to me all part of an effort to stigmatize a "pedophile" as sleazy and dangerous, perhaps with a racial subtext involved as well.

[RoosterDance]

An HIV positive person on treatment does not need to inform their partner of their status, although legally, some places demand this because of outdated lawmaking.

This I did not know. That makes this even worse than I thought! They trying to start another AIDS panic?

[Jim Burton]

Not so much a panic - but they are using the stigma of HIV against an individual they want to prosecute the hell out of. The accusation from one alleged victim, is that he deliberately infected him, but I couldn't find any confirmatory information about this in my skimming of the transcript. That means they don't have the test results to prove it, and could just be going off hearsay. So nothing better than to use what they do know (his serostatus) to poison the public against him.

[RoosterDance]

I couldn't find any confirmatory information about this in my skimming of the transcript. That means they don't have the test results to prove it, and could just be going off hearsay.

It doesn't surprise me to hear this.
But I more meant that if they're not careful with their propaganda, they might start another AIDS panic inadvertently.

[Scorchingwilde]

Not so much a panic - but they are using the stigma of HIV against an individual they want to prosecute the hell out of. The accusation from one alleged victim, is that he deliberately infected him, but I couldn't find any confirmatory information about this in my skimming of the transcript. That means they don't have the test results to prove it, and could just be going off hearsay. So nothing better than to use what they do know (his serostatus) to poison the public against him.

I see. That's a relief about the actual circumstances, I'm all to aware of some people actively and deliberately spreading things, but it's also greatly disheartening to see medical misinformation in the courts.