Kingston 2006

A London man was charged with passing HIV on to his male partner, but he pleaded not guilty and was acquitted of the charge in August 2006. The judge directed the jury to find the defendant not guilty after evidence given in his defence by an expert virologist. The defence case successfully argued that it was impossible to prove absolutely whether or not the man had passed HIV to his partner. A key aspect of the case was evidence that the complainant, whose sex life was discussed in detail during the case, had a clear history of unprotected sex with others without regularly testing for HIV.

This was the first prosecution for HIV transmission to end in a not guilty verdict. Before this case, many people had assumed that virological evidence could provide a level of proof similar to DNA or fingerprint evidence. In fact, the analysis involved is extremely complex and it is very difficult to prove whether HIV has been passed from one person to another. The acquittal is likely to have an impact on future cases, because prosecutions have relied heavily on the strength of scientific evidence.  This case demonstrated that particularly where other sexual partners are involved, HIV transmission is often not that clear-cut.