ABSTRACT
Contemporarily, the problems and complexities surrounding the issue of sexual consent have been highlighted in relation to HIV/AIDS. On Friday March 16th 2001 Stephen Kelly was found guilty of knowingly infecting his girlfriend with the HIV virus (Scott, 2001). He was jailed for five years for ‘culpable and reckless conduct’ (Scott, 2001, p. 9). This is the first time that anyone in the UK has been convicted of deliberately infecting another person with the virus. Anne Craig, Stephen Kelly’s girlfriend contends that she was unaware of Kelly’s HIV status, however, Kelly maintains that he had been honest about his heroin use and HIV infection. This event raises various concerns on numerous levels with regard to the negotiation of consent such as: the extent to which consent is informed consent; who and what individuals are consenting to; individual/shared responsibility for safer sex; concealment, deceit, disclosure, revelation and inquisition. Is the onus on the individual/s with HIV/AIDS (or other sexually transmitted infections (STDs)), to disclose or on the prospective partner/s engaged in a sexual encounter or relationship to ask about an individual/s HIV/AIDS status? As can be discerned from the above, these issues also have great significance with regard to the criminal justice system in terms of whose interpretation and account of events will be accorded legitimacy.
