The logistics of filing charges in SC would be a nightmare and highly unlikely to occur.

The only law I could find in SC regarding throwing bodily fluids on another individual involves prisoners or inmates who would do it toward correctional facility employees. That certainly does not apply here.

 

From what I've been told the laws are often written so as to include intent to infect and involve the person throwing bodily fluids to have knowledge that he/she is HIV positive. When any type of law enforcement/fire/emt personnel are involved it gets ratcheted up a notch, or several.

^What better way to teach them that their actions have consequences than to take baseball away from them their senior year? I'd say that would be a really good life lesson learned.

I'd say they have already learned their lesson whether you take the baseball away from them or not.

I'd say they have already learned their lesson whether you take the baseball away from them or not.

 

How so?

Serious question did you play basketball, baseball or football in high school? Have you ever coached kids for extended period of time in any of the above sports.

 

If you answer yes to any of them, then this behavior shouldn't be shocking. I just don't understand the mindset of extreme punishment for offenders if this was their first offense. I'd rather keep them on the team where hopefully I can help them not make anymore poor decisions.

 

I think a suspension works best because it keeps the teammates around them and if the suspensions causes losses they see first hand how their poor decision making hurts those around them. But I'm not disowning a kid over this , if he hasn't been trouble in the past . In no way should that be the case.

 

Even the criminal justice system is lenient to first time offenders who have no pattern of criminal behavior.

From what I've been told the laws are often written so as to include intent to infect and involve the person throwing bodily fluids to have knowledge that he/she is HIV positive. When any type of law enforcement/fire/emt personnel are involved it gets ratcheted up a notch, or several.

 

Which begs the question how do any of us (specifically the victim) know what was contained in the multiple samples of urine?

Even the criminal justice system is lenient to first time offenders who have no pattern of criminal behavior.

 

Unfortunately, not always.

From what I've been told the laws are often written so as to include intent to infect and involve the person throwing bodily fluids to have knowledge that he/she is HIV positive. When any type of law enforcement/fire/emt personnel are involved it gets ratcheted up a notch, or several.

 

Agreed. I was merely trying to show that I don't think this particular case has a criminal angle.

How so?

I'd say all of the offenders parents know what their kids have done. There has been suspensions handed out with more discipline to possibly come. Other consequences have taken place as well but I'm thinking lessons have been learned and will continue to be taught regarding all of this will take place for a long time. I believe we are at 10K views on this thread. This isn't a secret by any means.

Which begs the question how do any of us (specifically the victim) know what was contained in the multiple samples of urine?

 

We don't but it doesn't sound like it would have any bearing on possible court actions, other than civil of course.

I'd say all of the offenders parents know what their kids have done. There has been suspensions handed out with more discipline to possibly come. Other consequences have taken place as well but I'm thinking lessons have been learned and will continue to be taught regarding all of this will take place for a long time. I believe we are at 10K views on this thread. This isn't a secret by any means.

 

A 3 day suspension is about as weak as it gets IMO.

We don't but it doesn't sound like it would have any bearing on possible court actions, other than civil of course.

 

Civil is a whole different animal, depending on what the family wants to pursue.

We don't but it doesn't sound like it would have any bearing on possible court actions, other than civil of course.

 

I would say if the parents sue that is a much bigger epidemic in this country than kids making dumb decisions.

I would say if the parents sue that is a much bigger epidemic in this country than kids making dumb decisions.

 

I would tend to agree and I just don't see it happening. But then again it's not my child and I don't know what the powers that be will decide.

I would say if the parents sue that is a much bigger epidemic in this country than kids making dumb decisions.

 

They may or may not win and it may or may not be justified, but they certainly have the right to sue.