Australia: Man gets 4 1/2 years for impossible HIV transmission

Update: December 16th
Wepukhulu Zebtek was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in prison by Judge Allan Fenbury who "said the sentence would deter other carriers of the HIV virus from not informing their sexual partners". Mr Zebtek will be eligible for parole in two years and three months.

Original post: October 19th
Something is very wrong with this picture. In January 2008, I reported that a Perth man, Wepukhulu Zebtek, now 44, had been charged with aggravated sexual penetration after allegedly raping a woman and apparently infecting her with HIV, but that his lawyer had successfully argued that since the woman had tested HIV-positive three days following the alleged rape, his client could not possibly have infected the woman, because it takes much longer than three days to form antibodies to HIV.

Today, the AAP reports that Mr Zebtek has pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm after the charge of aggravated sexual penetration was finally dropped last month.

In other words, he has pleaded guilty to infecting a woman he couldn't have possibly infected, something that none of the various Australian news outlets, such as ABC news and Fox news mention.

In fact none the reports now mention that the sex they had was originally, allegedly non-consensual, but all the stories focus on the fact that Mr Zebtek didn't use a condom despite knowing he was HIV-positive. Only the AAP story also mentions that he didn't disclose before unprotected sex (which is an important element of the 'crime').

Obviously some deal has been done between his original arraignment and today's guilty plea, but I don't understand why Mr Zebtek would plead guilty to this charge, given the evidence that he couldn't possibly have infected the complainant.

I can only guess that it has something do with his previous history of unprotected sex, although this did not result in any criminal charges, according to the AAP story.

He had been counselled by the Victorian Department of Health in 2002 after a number of reports he was having unprotected sex with women other than his wife. Mr Sholz said Zebtek had denied the claims at the time but was given comprehensive and clear evidence about the risks of unprotected sex and was told he must practise safe sex. Victorian authorities closed his file after 2004 and Zebtek moved to W[estern] A[ustralia].

Mr Zebtek has been released on bail until his sentencing in December, when he faces up to ten years in prison.

Australia: Perth man stabbed with syringe unlikely to have HIV

So much of the reporting I see on HIV-related 'crimes' is shoddy and scare-mongering, so I was pleased to see this follow-up story from ABC News online that highlights how hard it is to be infected with HIV by being stabbed in the shoulder with a syringe.

The original story from ABC News online, entitled, 'Stab victim fears HIV infection,' had gaven a rather different impression. It's a shame, though, that ABC News didn't approach the Health Department before airing their first report.

The Health Department of [Western Australia] says there is a very slim chance a 55-year-old man stabbed with a syringe near the Midland train station has contracted HIV.

The victim was told 'welcome to the world of HIV' when he was stabbed in the shoulder by a man he refused to give money to.

The Department's Director of Communicable Disease Control Paul Van Buynder says there has never been a case in WA of a person contracting the virus after being attacked by someone with a syringe.

"There was one health care worker in the last 25 years while we've been monitoring this that did sustain a needle stick injury with a known HIV positive patient and that patient did seroconvert despite taking medication at the time, but that's the only case in the last 25 years in Western Australia," he said.

Dr Van Buynder says even if the assailant had the virus there would only be a three in one thousand chance of the man contracting it.

"The risk of Hepatitis C and Hepatitis B, which are more infectious diseases, is higher than the risk of HIV, but again it relates to the possibility of the assailant themselves being infected."

Australia: Western Australia proposes new public health laws to detain HIV-positive people who 'put others at risk'

A proposed change to Public Health law in the State of Western Australia would allow people with HIV to be detained and forced to undergo medical treatment.

WA's Public Health executive director, Tarun Weeramanthri, used recent concerns over a sex worker who was named and shamed by health officials in the Australian Capital Territory, to argue that these changes were a good thing.

Ironically, Health Consumers Council executive director, Michelle Kosky, is also for the changes. She believes that the new law would provide HIV-positive individuals with more rights, because for the first time, it allowed people detained under these laws to be able to appeal to the State Administrative Tribunal.

Full story from The Sunday Times (of Australia) below:

Disease carriers may be detained without charge
By Anthony Decegle
February 24, 2008 01:00am
Article from: The Sunday Times


PEOPLE carrying dangerous diseases and sexually transmitted infections, such as HIV, could be detained without charge and forced to undergo medical treatment under legal changes.

A new public health Bill is set to replace the existing law, which is nearly 100 years old, and give the The Western Australian Health Department powers to deal swiftly with individuals who it suspects pose a threat to the community.

Those affected could be banned from venues such as nightclubs, public baths or bars and have to submit to supervision or face the threat of a $50,000 fine. They could also be forced to take antibiotics.

If passed, the new law would replace the WA Health Act 1911 which, according to State Government literature, has "significant limitations in regard to its application to people who knowingly expose others to the risk of HIV infection".

Public Health executive director Tarun Weeramanthri said the deliberate spreading of sexual diseases was a real threat.

The Health Department was forced to put out an urgent warning earlier this month after a 41-year-old male sex worker infected with HIV was charged by police in the Australian Capital Territory.

The sex worker previously lived in WA.

"It is believed that the man may have had unsafe sex with clients in the ACT and other jurisdictions, including WA," Communicable Disease Control director Gary Dowse said.

"It is believed some of the people contacted may have been WA residents and it is possible that other persons in WA may have had contact with the man in the past."

Dr Weeramanthri said the Public Health Bill clarified the terms for dealing with people who had infectious diseases.

"The old act gives certain powers, but doesn't say exactly under what circumstances you may apply them," he said.

"This Bill clarifies the range of circumstances in which someone might act."

Dr Weeramanthri said the Bill was based on a principle of precaution; officials could act on suspicions faster.

"If you think there is a serious risk in the intermediate to long term, even though you may not have all of the evidence right now, it's ethical and prudent to act on the risk," he said.

"You can't just use the lack of definitive evidence as an excuse for not acting. You use common sense."

Public Health Association national president Mike Daube said the Bill would modernise public health legislation.

"It ensures that the health of the community is properly protected," he said. "This is much better than trying to work off legislation that was written long before HIV was even dreamed of."

The Health Department refused to reveal the number of people with an STD infection who were being monitored.

Health Consumers Council executive director Michelle Kosky said the new Bill would provide people with more rights. For the first time, these individuals would be able to appeal to the State Administrative Tribunal.

Australia: Perth man released on bail

A major update on the case of Wepukhulu Zebtek reported on Monday.

His new lawyer has successfully argued that since the woman tested HIV-positive three days following the alleged rape, his client could not have infected the woman. Zebtek is now out on bail.

..his new lawyer Jeremy Noble today won a fresh application after saying the police statement of facts indicated the woman was infected with HIV seven to 14 days before her test. "That would exclude Mr Zebtek as the person that might have infected the complainant,'' Mr Noble said.

Of course, no HIV antibody test can pinpoint when someone was infected; but if someone tests HIV antibody positive three days after an alleged transmission event, you can be 100% certain that the infection is much older than three days (since it can take longer than that for a newly infected individual to produce antibodies, at least 30 days on average).

However, the window period between infection and detection can be reduced to about a week if nucleic acid detection assays are used: these are also known as viral load tests, and look for parts of HIV's genetic material. Since mainstream reporters don't understand the issues here, there's no information in any of the reports on the kind of 'HIV test' that the police used.

The story is covered in the greatest detail in the online version of the Perth Times.

Australia: Perth man charged with criminal HIV transmission, rape

A Perth man, Wepukulu Zebtec, has been charged with 'aggravated sexual penetration' after allegedly raping a woman and apparently infecting her with HIV.

"The court was also told that the woman went to Royal Perth Hospital three days after the assault and returned a positive HIV test result."

Story has so far only been reported by ABC News.