Thank you to attorney James Felton for writing this up for me…read on…
Charlie Sheen – Does Paying for Sex Provide Him Any Cover
By: James R. Felton
Unless you were sleeping all week last week, you certainly heard that Charlie Sheen confessed to being HIV Positive. It appears that many of the actors and actresses in the adult world knew this well before the announcement. Even if that were the case, most, if not all, of the non-adult world had no idea. Now, certainly, Charlie Sheen has been more than public about the goddesses or his lineup of sexual dalliances that could best be described as his flavor of the month. In his case, it might be better described as flavor of the week. It would be of no surprise to anyone if Charlie had a doctor on staff shooting him with penicillin or whatever the latest and greatest antibiotic exists for the treatment of a sexually transmitted disease. But, HIV positive – that came out of left field.
Sheen stated that he told his sexual partners of his status. Most dispute that they knew. Of course, they certainly knew that he was a player and if unprotected sex took place, an escort probably couldn’t be taken too seriously if she caught an STD. With that said, HIV is at another level.
California has a somewhat lenient statute when it comes to the transmission of HIV. In order for a person to be guilty of a felony (which carries a jail sentence), a person must willfully expose another to HIV through unprotected sex.
The law makes it a felony punishable by up to eight years of imprisonment for an HIV-positive person to “willfully expose” another person to HIV through unprotected sex. The elements of the crime are 1) participating in anal or vaginal sex; 2) knowing that you are HIV positive, 3) failing to disclose your status as HIV Positive, 4) failing to use a condom and 5) having the specific intent to infect the other person. This last element is likely to be very difficult to prove in most cases and probably difficult to prove in Charlie Sheen’s case. I don’t know the guy but it doesn’t sound like he had a vendetta with any of the women with whom he had unprotected sex after he knew he was HIV Positive. Time will tell whether any such information will be presented to the Los Angeles District Attorney. Charlie may dodge criminal prosecution.
However, civil liability is a whole different issue. Charlie is likely to find himself a defendant in any number of civil actions that will likely sound in battery, intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress, fraud, and who knows what else Gloria Allred will think up.
So, the next question is whether, as a defense to any of these causes of action, Charlie can allege that a particular escort assumed the risk by having unprotected sex. If this defense is raised, I think it will fail, at least as it relates to HIV.
Let’s examine this for a minute. First, there have been multiple cases in which a spouse (or more likely a former spouse) sues their partner for giving them an STD. In order to succeed in such matters, a plaintiff generally has to prove that the “giver” knew that he or she had an STD although a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim would likely not require knowledge. That claim would be made if the “giver” had reason to believe that they were engaging in dangerous conduct (i.e. sleeping around) without informing their partner.
Now, as it relates to the transmission of an STD by someone to an acknowledged escort (or vice-versa), that might be an interesting legal battle. Certainly, engaging in non-protected sex with a sex worker could very well be seen as an assumption of risk. Again, the cases may turn on the specific factual presentation (i.e. did the person know or suspect that he or she had an STD and not disclose or did the escort not take precautions which would likely eliminate the issue altogether).
The assumption of risk doctrine doesn’t work for me in the context of the transmission of HIV. Now, certainly if there were proof that Charlie told the escort about his condition, and the escort had unprotected sex anyway, assumption of risk may be a “winning” defense. But without evidence of disclosure, I don’t think assumption of risk will provide Charlie with any cover. I don’t think any escort that he hired could have reasonably assumed that he might be HIV Positive. Again, perhaps if the evidence were that everyone in the adult world knew and the specific escort knew, then Charlie may prevail but without that, I don’t think it will be a valid defense. HIV is potentially a death sentence and I don’t see a judge or jury given Charlie a pass because the escort should have thought he might be infecting her with what could be a terminal illness. Time will tell and as the swarms of his liaisons meet and discuss amongst them how he operated, perhaps light will be shed on whether it was obvious that he had HIV.
Last question on the topic – so assume that a paid escort, who had unprotected sex with Charlie Sheen after he was aware that he had HIV, sues Charlie in civil court. The lawsuit outlines the sexual encounter(s) that took place and that the escort was paid to have sex with him. Will that lawsuit draw the interest of the City Attorney or District Attorney to file prostitution charges against the escort? I guess we shall see.
36 Responses
Charlie Sheen – Does Paying for Sex Provide Him Any Cover https://t.co/H4mxRO7RNj
So you can’t get HIV from oral sex (only vaginal and anal)?
@karmafan
I am not sure if there has ever been much in the way of legitimately documented cases of getting HIV from giving a man a blowjob (as these female escorts would do). If there is, it is such a tiny number it doesn’t even register. I suppose you could say they should add that to the law, however, it is something that is about as common as seeing a unicorn so that is probably why they kept it off.
Girls do assume risk of catching STI’s when having bareback sex; and likely catch some here and there just like they do on porn sets. However, HIV is a whole different beast, is terminal (and significantly life changing even if you do live for 20 years), and has criminal laws written for it. No way CHarlie could sell that nonsense in a civil suit saying “I didn’t have to tell them because the risk is implied due to no condoms”. That may fly if a sex worker tries to sue you for giving them Herpes, but no way with HIV> Just my thoughts.
Mike, for your last question. I can’t see any prosecutor wanting to waste their time pursuing a prostitution charge because a girl admits to it in a civil suit. Do you? Maybe if someone was a real activist they may want to, but would their bosses sign off on the expense of that? It would be difficult for someone to sell to their bosses that they want to spend a bunch of money just to nail someone like Bree Olson (or any other professional porn performer) with a prostitution charge for benefit to society. I find that hard to fathom in a case like this; however America loves to prosecute!
Sharing IV drug works and Anal are most risky. Vaginal is next, Oral transmission is possible but not common. Our mouths have added defenses to protect us from all sorts of stuff that’s easier to get than HIV such as food borne bacteria that thrive vs die through the upper digestive tract. even if we weren’t in a committed monogamous relationship I’d be more worried about eating unwashed Chipotle produce than getting HIV from bliwjobs.
@joeschmoe
If they’re chasing sexual assault aka intent to transmit then they give the complainant a pass via listing them as the victim. His partners might line up to pursue civil suits but NFW are they going to try criminal. Our youngest dragged home a classmate with lots of drama…the new BF infected his ex, was pawning off undetectable as HIV negative even providing a copy with vacation tickets …not taking meds for up to five months and responded to a demand for an antibody test with a tantrum and a bogus NDA and 50k non-existent money. neigboring county blew off the infected ex-fiancé who got nasty shock from annual gyn HIV test. She literally stalked all his new girlfriends to warn them…ultimately prosecutors used her infection to give him time and dropped the others to some assault after the four other victims who were all told they were the only one had to go to all their victim services appts and make themselves avail for depositions and keep coming back thru over a year of continuances before he pleaded. That’s for a scumbag with a public defender a good legal team would stretch it out till victims gave up.
The question will be if these girls have any actual evidence to boost their case that Charlie was HIV+ and did not tell them. Its mostly looking like he said/she said shit.
Karmafan, I don’t know whether or not you can get HIV from oral sex. I suspect that you can. However, the statute specifically only applies to vaginal and anal. I didn’t review the legislative history to try to figure out why oral was excluded.
Jim. Thanks for a straight forward legal analysis. On the prostitution thing, don’t you think that unless an escort who files a civil suit has a long wrap sheet, not much is likely to come of that anyway? Paying a fine versus a potential pay day from Mr. Sheen, who might be inclined to settle this just to get it out of the news, seems like a reasonable risk/reward to me.
Interesting argument, but if HIV is no longer a death sentence with proper medical care, than courts could rule in favor of Charlie. Years ago, lawsuits were filed for herpes transmissions, and I remember a few won their case. And there was at least 1 case this year where a herpes lawsuit, where the the judge ruled that since its very difficult to determine who gave who what, the guy wasn’t liable for giving her herpes.
Jezebel and Gawker had a great write up on this.
Charlies most compelling argument, and best legal defense as put forth by Jezebel:
“This past March, the Repeal HIV Discrimination Act of 2015 was introduced to the US Congress: among other things, the act aimed to ensure that punitive HIV-specific laws, policies, and regulations are informed by “public health-oriented, evidence-based, medically accurate, and contemporary understanding of HIV.” The disclosure laws have long been questioned by those in the HIV advocacy community who argue that the laws are based on outdated science, and have failed to evolve with our knowledge that risk of transmission exists on a spectrum.”
http://jezebel.com/the-media-freakout-over-charlie-sheens-hiv-status-is-a-1743524287
ETA: Blind items have existed for a few years now, alleging that Charlie had HIV. People had to have known. Humans cant keep big secrets like that, its in our nature.
It is interesting that California’s HIV transmission law is so lenient. Having to prove intent to transmit is a hole big enough to throw Fort Knox and all of its supposed gold bullion through. I guess Chuckie won’t be going to jail for giving some poor naive woman HIV in California (although he could still go to jail/prison in other states and/or countries). Theoretically he could be sued civilly but for some reason I doubt he has to worry about that one — even if some chick was shameless enough to sue him he can pay her off for $50K or so and make the lawsuit go away.
Ok let’s try and piece this story together. Apparently one of the escorts took a picture of Charlies medications and threatened to go public with it. If she saw the pills took a picture, the had sex with him after, the blackmailed him, what legal ground would that person have to stand on? Same for any of the girls that signed the non-disclosure agreement that may have had Charlie’s HIV in the fine print, but these girls probably didn’t read it and maybe signed their potential lawsuit away?
I am no lawyer but realize Sheen has a net worth of around 100 million dollars. What’s going to happen is he is going to just settle with all these girls for different prices depending on how much evidence they have against him. 100K payoff to Sheen is like going to McDonalds for a McDouble for you or me.
Any escort associated with Sheen from here on out can pretty much kiss their careers goodbye. Who is going to want to hire Georgia Jones now? How about Kacey Jordan? How about Cassandra Cruz if she wanted to make a comeback. NO ONE will hire them because of the HIV Stigma. Even if they don’t have it they are guilty by associating with it.
I will conclude by saying Charlie got his HIV through sex with another man or transexual. There is a story about him luring male pornstars over to his crib and paying them 10-15K just to “hang out.” LOL. OK sure. He got HIV because he wanted to take it up the but from some hot transexual and his anus probably got cut and bled because it was tight this persons seminal fluids entered the cuts, and the rest is history.
In this one post I have proved that you don’t need an MD or a Law Degree to know what the fuck is going on.
HIV laws are proof that special interest lobbyists are effective at creating conundrums. The legislative history on HIV laws is very interesting and amazing too.
Trying to wrap head around the five listed elements to “willfully expose” and wonder if or how effective treatment would affect this with respect to mitigating ‘intent’ to transmit. Would showing a docs letter and quarterly tests proving compliance with the medical regimen be an alibi of sorts to head off or defend a criminal prosecution? Kinda seems that’s exactly what Dr. H was doing speaking on the Today show about how remarkable it was Sheen maintained adherence to his HIV medicine.
Most of my research has been limited to the OSHA policy and workplace stuff that caught my eye two years ago. Came in here screaming WTF they aren’t doing antibody tests and still don’t have any answers to if there is a Lowest Permissible Level defined for exposure to HIV. No defined magic number and too much disagreement between experts. There’s lots of naturally occurring parts per million kind of workplace stuff out there that’s more scary than HIV. They don’t have a stigma attached to them because outside those affected or covering their ass to prevent liability no one has a clue what they are.
What’s even more amazing than HIV legislative histories is the fact that more people know how you don’t get it than how you do. Pretty messed up when society is more focused on preventing discrimination against a disease than actually preventing the disease with accurate information.
@mharris
Look at the penalty and conditions. It’s not a lenient law. It basically says if someone HIV and isn’t wearing a condom when having sex they’re on par with a crazy asshole running around city streets or the subway jabbing people with infected needles.
we do need to repeal all sorts of condition, disease,….specific marginalization laws because they’re all fear based. Created because of anecdotal events with the demand for systemic responses. On one hand the groups demand protection on the other they get the word out and then other groups demand punitive penalties in exchange or as an exclusion to the protections.
So much for doing away with Leprosariums. 🙂
@lurking reader Exactly! I would be absolutely terrified if I ever contracted HIV, however I also know as a rational human who reads things, knows that it can be manageable and knowledge takes away some the fear. Bree saying “It was like Charlie put a gun to my head”, is not only disingenuous and ignorant, it’s a harmful stereotype that encourages people not to get tested for HIV, and a narrative that punishes other HIV positive people (she can hate Charlie as much as she wants) for having it.
Is this where we make jokes about the loaded gun jambing?
Seems like some over the top histrionics. Is it whew or yikes? negative tests at each annual gyn or traumatized looking at fifty car pileup ahead vs in rear view mirror. Meh…dramatic ambiguity is good entertainment 🙂
@mdxxx
you really need to stop trying to forward your anti gay agenda. We get your views and know people like you. No need to keep putting it over. We also are smart enough to know that the likelyhood he got it from receiving anal is higher, however for you to state it as fact is rubbish. Yes we know he fucked guys and TS. He could have also got it from a woman (even if you think that unlikely), and he could have got it from sharing a needle (this guy is a drug user after all). Does it really matter who he got it from other that your “TS and Gay is evil and bad” agenda?
As for your estimation of his net worth. There is no way it is that high after all the money he has blown. I would be shocked he could possibly have that much left. Yes, I know he was making north of 25 million a year in his heyday of 2 1/2 men, however that was only a short period that he made that much, and we all know he was dumping as much as a million a month on partying and paying for companions.
Interesting discussion nonetheless.
@joeschmoe No Anti-Gay Agenda here. Just stating actual facts that backup that the homosexual community spreads it more than any other outlet. I agree Needle Drugs could have been it, but Charlie seemed more of a snorter and a smoker to me than a needle user. It takes a really unique type of person to decide to stick a needle in their arm.
As for Sheen’s net worth, you have to factor in all the property he owns, and the fact that he probably had more investments go right then go wrong.
The penalty and conditions may not be light but what Mike describes is a law that is just about impossible to violate. Unless there is intent to give someone HIV the law isn’t violated. I can accuse Chuckie of a lot but I doubt he intended to give HIV to anyone. Contrast that with Michigan where just the act of pre-marital sex carries life plus five years (through two law violations) and giving someone HIV (whether intended or not) by not telling a sex partner about an HIV infection adds two more violations to the pile with an additional life plus an additional five years. Compared to that California’s law is very lenient in this regard IMO.
I hate to say it, Joe and MDXXX but do we really know that Chuckie fucked transvestites? I haven’t watched every interview he has done lately but don’t recall hearing of him admitting to being gay or bi. Yes insertive anal sex is the easiest way to get HIV for a man but it is possible he got it through sharing needles (he is a known drug user although he has not discussed methods of administration) or some high-viral load chickie fucking his dick while it had an open cut on it for her HIV to hitch a one-way ride to ruining poor Chuckie’s life. Don’t assume Chuckie is gay or bi just because he somehow ended up with HIV. For all we know he could have had a surgery and received an HIV tainted blood transfusion.
I would love to smoke 7 gram of crack with Charlie.
@mdxxx
I’m no lawyer either but expect most JD or MD reading your comment would ROFL at notion it proved anything.
He says he told, they say he didn’t. Hard to prove in any situation but it seems he was more willing to pay then face the alternative of a lawsuit. That kinda gets my gears rolling with his claims that he was extorted and didn’t infect anyone.
The pic rumor from its start was that it was taken after they had sex and he hadn’t disclosed. The NDA attributed to him simply lists health as one of the examples of things not to be discussed.
NDA don’t stop people from seeking compensation for harm. It can stop discussion of the harm or any compensation. Which explains my position that the NDA made him vulnerable and in part motivated his disclosure on national TV.
If he was disclosing before he had sex then why was he paying hush money vs having his lawyer use the demand to pursue criminal charges for extortion?
It’s troubling that you mention HIV stigma via guilt by association with the assumption that you don’t think a clean test would clear up any questions. Whether performers and stakeholders are comfortable with the RNA particle tests or insist on an antibody test it seems the bigger risk is that anyone shaking Sheen down for hush money wouldn’t hesitate to do the same to anyone else.
Basing your conclusion of how Sheen got HIV on rumors fuels misguided hysteria. Plenty of people who’s body never saw a dirty needle or exposed their anus to a penis or any other foreign object discover they are HIV positive. Amazing but true even pearl clutching vanilla sex exclusively heterosexual people can get and spread HIV. Some unaware they were even at risk because they don’t meet any of the rumored stereotypical stigmas.
Lol Mharris how many DNA proven parents have been prosecuted for fornication cuz they’d rather pay to lock em up vs welfare? Did MI take a page out of China’s one kid book? Have two kids out of wedlock and go to jail for life?
I’d buy California as more lenient if MI prosecuted for transmission regardless of knowledge. For example prosecuting if any partner notifications came back positive in keeping with the spirit of the archaic fornication law you love to hate 😉
Fake Ari… you just aren’t as funny as you think you are in all your troll posts. Find something else to do dude.
Fake Ari… you just aren’t as funny as you think you are in all your troll posts. Find something else to do dude.
I would have to physically drive to every county’s courthouse and research the records for fornication cases county by county to get that information (many smaller counties in MI have not computerized their records). I am not curious enough to spend thousands of dollars in gas, hotel, restaurant food and weeks of my time to find out. I know the county I live in hasn’t had a fornication prosecution since the late 1990’s at least. As of 1990 Kent County (home of two of Michigan’s largest cities) prosecutors were not pressing fornication charges either. That doesn’t mean that no county prosecutors are enforcing the law, though — and it can legally be dusted off and used anywhere in the state if it suits the prosecutor’s whims (Chuckie Sheen fucking a chick and not telling her about his HIV infection would get many prosecutor’s attention quite quickly — especially one looking to run for higher office and there is always that tea party asshole Bill Schuette in the state AG’s office who has the power to prosecute even if the county prosecutor does not want to prosecute himself, I know for sure it would get his attention). The law specifically banning fucking and not telling for HIV patients is also there to pursue whether fornication is actually charged or not and that is life plus five years on its own.
Interesting tidbit: King Asshole AG Bill Schuette was caught fucking some chick he wasn’t married to a few years ago. The fornication charges for that case were not pressed but the decision was not made before a state Supreme Court justice weighed in publicly and said the law was constitutional and he could theoretically be charged. I think if King Asshole hadn’t been caught breaking the law himself right before taking office as AG we would be seeing him pressing fornication charges left and right out of his office to any parent applying for welfare and not being able to prove he/she was married to the other parent at conception (he is against welfare and evidently thinks kids should be in foster care if parents cannot afford them). Utah prosecutors did that for a while in the late 90’s and early 2000’s, so many were convicted (and according to the article all were welfare applicants/recipients — so we know what they were really up to) that it made the Wall Street Journal front page. I know when my (adult) sister got knocked up and wasn’t married (the statute of limitations is long ago expired on that one) I pushed her hard to marry the father just so she didn’t go to prison (which she did) — to this day hospitals are legally required to report out of wedlock births to the prosecutor’s office in the county of residence so short of her leaving the state to give birth there was no way to hide that one other than a wedding.
Yes, Fake Ari is the king of trolls and about as funny as Richard “Tricky Dick” Nixon on the day he resigned the Presidency. I hear he has AIDS, crabs, snotty dick and sores all over his privates; is only two feet tall, dirty, smelly and lives under a bridge like the trolls in children’s stories. 🙂 If anyone actually believes the above paragraph I have some swamp land I would like to sell you right next to Sheriff Arpaio’s tent jail facility (in Maricopa County, Arizona).
Many years ago my 14 year old cousin got knocked up by her 15 year old BF and the judge ordered them to get married (which they did). This was in Rhode Island.In those days it was pretty common for a judge to give a kid a choice of going to prison (minor felonies) or to join the service.
@mharris
All that for a rhetorical question? Since you did thanks for the laugh. Hope you had a great day.m
Lol Karmafan, I’m also old enough to recall pick your poison sentences, Archie Comics, and sending off for Bazooka gum premiums. Lots of kids too young for the draft kept Uncle Sam Wants You posters as a reminder of what was at stake. Marriage with the possibility of divorce was an attractive option back then.
It did not strike me as a rhetorical question, Lurking (at least the first part). Maybe my interpretation of your question was colored by my life’s experiences but questions like that have started academics researching and writing an paper on subjects like this (with the goal of publishing in a scholarly publication). If I were a criminal justice professor (my education and credentials are in accounting although I have coursework putting me more than halfway to a BA in criminal justice) I might have actually pursued that option, this subject is actually one a professor could use to justify a year long paid sabbatical, a research assistant and a five-figure grant from his university to cover expenses. It would also be a good subject for a Ph. D. candidate to research and write his doctoral thesis on. I guess I explained part of the process that an academic would have to pursue to write such a paper.
I was also reading Wikipedia article on fornication (I know, not a scholarly source) and in it there was an attorney’s interpretation of the SCOTUS decision striking down sodomy bans would likely also apply to state fornication bans as well if it were pushed. If someone had a million dollars to put into an appeal (through the system including several stops at lower courts) to the SCOTUS and was willing to sit in prison for a few years while the case made its way through the system he/she could find a county still enforcing the fornication ban, get convicted and possibly get the bans struck down as unconstitutional (that would be a big gamble, if the case were lost he/she would likely spend the rest of his life in prison).
A judge telling a felon to choose between four years in the military or prison was common in Michigan until the mid-70’s as well, Karmafan. I am surprised a couple only ages 14 and 15 were ordered to get married in Rhode Island, though — I suspect their marriage would not hold up to legal scrutiny today if they were to file for divorce or annulment and be declared invalid if the wedding took place there. There were a couple of southern states (at least up until the 1950’s) that allowed marriage at 14 (Mississippi being one) but here in Michigan even a judge could not legally write a court order allowing (and certainly not forcing) kids that young to marry — the minimum age for marriage has been 16 here at least since anyone here can remember.
I want to smoke 7 gram rocks with Matthew Harris and Karmafan and
watch them jerk off to porn with Bisexual male performers and
have butt sex with each other. Just like Charlie Sheen.
Winning ! !
“I am no lawyer ….. ” is probably the only factual statement in that post.
I’m surprised no mention here of the drama brewing between Stoya and James Dean and her claiming he raped her?
@mharris
May have to revise my stance on the merits of Wikipedia since it brought you much closer to the heart of this situation. Two weeks ago I said
“He isn’t going to jail. This is about him keeping his money. Cheaper to buy a campaign pushing to decriminalize ‘undetectable HIV’ which will be funded by tons of people with money to stop the extortion.”
Sheen didn’t have to hunt for a county arbitrarily enforcing an archaic law. He lives in one of many states with criminal ‘exposure’ vs criminal transmission laws created in the past thirty years.
It’s going to be fun watching this playout over the next year as the next step to the OSHA draft policy that I knew was a game changer. The campaign to change this criminalized knowledge law started long before Sheen submitted to play poster boy for the grand opening on the Today Show. He won’t be the face or actively campaign for the lobbying groups that will be using his experience nor will he be sending them legal notices demanding they retract the use of his name.