Press release flagged as hot topic at GLBT police liaison meeting
COMMUNITY NEWS / Monthly meeting besieged with questions and concerns
Noreen Fagan and Neil McKinnon / Ottawa / Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Share |

Ottawa Police Service GLBT Liaison Committee members Joyce Drouin, Marion Steele and Sgt Joan McKenna.
(Neil McKinnon photo)
Monday's Ottawa Police Service (OPS) GLBT Liaison Committee meeting was dominated by the hot-button topic of a press release sent out last week identifying a man — by name and photo — charged with aggravated sexual assault after failing to disclose his HIV-positive status before having unprotected sex.

The much anticipated public meeting was attended by liaison members, individuals from the queer community and representatives from local queer organizations Bruce House, Jer’s Vision and the Youth Services Bureau (YSB). Also in attendance were those responsible for the press release, Inspector John McGetrick and Police Deputy Chief Gilles Larochelle.

The discussion over the press release began with Inspector Joan McKenna, co-chair of the GLBT liaison committee, admitting to attaching the phrase "sexual predator" to the release sent by the committee on May 10. McKenna expressed regret at her choice of words but emphasized the police force's concerns.

“My concern was for community and the health of individuals. I’ve learned a lot from this. I’ve never been known to avoid conflict,” said McKenna. “My role is to continue my relationship with this community.”

The GLBT liaison committee forwarded the press release to its email subscribers on May 10, even though Marion Steele, the liaison's community co-chair, was unhappy with the inflammatory language and the public health contacts used in the release. Steele was unable to contact anyone and had no clear authority to stop the release.

McKenna stated the release was a result of police consultation. However, Larochelle and McKenna agreed — with sensitive issues pertaining to the queer community — it was possible to discuss having press releases checked by community co-chairs before being sent to the GLBT liaison's newsletter subscribers.

McGetrick, who was responsible for sending the press release to media on May 7, stated the OPS’ initial intent was to help people. He said the decision to include the photo on the press release was out of concern for pubic safety.

“I don’t know a single officer who can put his head down at night knowing they didn’t do the best they could,” said McGetrick.

The stance taken by the police was met with the counter argument that the press release was inflammatory and ignored public health concerns that such attention would discourage people from getting tested.

Jeremy Dias, executive director of Jer’s Vision, raised concerns about the consultation process behind the decision to include a photo on the release.

“I don’t understand how my police force can go against what so many of our community work for,” said Dias.

Dias also said the press release incited fear in a community that is already fearful of the police, and that it could drive people away from getting tested.

Jay Koornstra, executive director of Bruce House, was also concerned with the way the press release was handled. Koornstra said that the criminalization of HIV creates a false sense of security and that it discourages people from getting testing.

Andrea Poncia, program leader of HIV/AIDS prevention education at YSB, also agreed that the police tactics — with regards to the press release — were counter-productive.

“You are making it so people won’t get tested,” said Poncia.

Despite concerns raised by queer community representatives, the majority of individuals in the room sided with the OPS' argument that public safety trumps personal privacy and public health concerns.

Many thanked the police for putting the photo on the press release and one community member, who requested not to be identified, admitted that seeing the accused's photo in The Ottawa Sun alerted him to the possibility of his friends coming in contact with the accused. He referred to himself as a victim because his 22-year-old partner — who is HIV-positive — had slept with the accused.

He called the 72 people he knew to be gay on his Blackberry — including Dias — and he found six people who had sex with the accused. In his opinion the accused is “quite frankly trying to infect people.”

The evening ended in a stalemate — the police stood by their commitment to public safety, while others stood by public health concerns and fear that the hard work done to prevent rising HIV transmission rates will be compromised.

The OPS GLBT Liaison Committee meets each month at the Ottawa Police station, 474 Elgin St. They are currently looking for new members. For more information go to www.glbt.ottawapolice.ca/main.cfm.


Share |


Reader Comments


 
Thought
I've heard that criminalization will lead to less people getting tested, and three people say that in this article. I haven't heard yet the evidence proving that statement. Where are the sources saying that? At this point, it's just a claim that may not be true.
Brent Kielmann, Ottawa Ontario
05/18/10 2:37 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Think of it this way..
Let's say you know you're HIV+, and you disclose your status to a trick before having sex with a condom. Now, let's say that trick later claims that you didn't disclose your HIV+ status, and has you arrested for sexual assault. Your face would be plastered all over an unsympathetic press, you're forever smeared as a "sexual predator," while your accuser will have their identity protected and would not be named in the press. In court, it's really your word against the trick, and it doesn't even matter if transmission occurred or not. Who is more believable, the "scary" HIV+ "sexual predator," or the HIV- "victim" who's trying to not get HIV? So, the logic goes, if learning your status can lead to scenarios like this, you're not likely to get tested to learn that you're HIV+. And if you are not aware of your status, then you have that defense that you knowingly passed on the virus.
Dan, Toronto ON
05/18/10 3:24 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Reply to: Brent's Thought
If you haven't noticed Brent, these are ASOs (AIDS Service Organizations) saying this. Their experience and empirical evidence from public health agencies show that when HIV transmission is criminalized, people do not get tested. It makes sense...Think about this: 'If transmitting HIV is a criminal activity then what would be the best way to avoid committing a crime? Not get tested. If you are not tested, you are unaware of your HIV status, and in that case you can just say "I was unaware"'. In our community (Ottawa), all kinds of people are afraid of getting tested for a variety of reasons. To now add a criminal aspect, increases the fear and reduces the number of people getting tested.
Tony, Ottawa ON
05/18/10 4:12 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Take responsibility
A lot of people are talking about how sex is fun. And the truth is, that is it! What people are not talking about is how sex is also a decision and that caries with it responsibilities. Sure it is easy to just trow your hands in the air and say: 'he should tell me he is poz' before you fuck bareback...but the truth is, you should not be an IDIOT! It is your body. Don't rely on other people to take care of you (especially some random hook up). Take care of yourself! Like bareback sex? Then find a long term partner and get tested together and wait 3 months and get tested again, and then fuck bareback. Still like bareback sex, but too fucking lazy to find a long term partner? Well get off to porn. You have options. It is not someone's responsibility to take care of you. MOST IMPORTANT: In Ottawa, the majority of infections are from people who do not get tested and do not know their status! So what are you gonna do?
Alex, Gatineau QC
05/18/10 4:20 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
RE: to Tony
My point is, just because they work with people who are positive, doesn't mean they're always right. If you make a claim, you still need to back it up with evidence other than the fact that "this is what we see". But not knowing your status still wouldn't hold up in court because that's considered negligence, and you can still be charged for infecting other people. I feel that that is a possibility, but people would be more afraid to get tested for their own health, rather than legal consequences. My point is, I'd like to see actual, published information showing me that what they say is what will happen.
Brent, Ottawa Ontario
05/18/10 4:56 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
It was the right thing to do
Being a member of the gay community in Ottawa, I feel it was the right thing to do. By posting the suspect's picture--it informs the public, in a means they will consume and be exposed to. If it were just a name or description, most would not know who it was--nor would they have been informed of the case. It is likely that he has contact with men who do not know his name. By putting the photo up, it helps people to seek medical treatment. For a suspect that police believe has had more than 12 partners and goes back a year--it is a public health concern for all gay males. When a person knowingly has contact with multiple partners, without disclosure, they are responsible for their actions.
Derek, Ottawa Ontario
05/18/10 6:01 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Tony: Emperical Data is Plentiful
Brent questions the claims made by people working within the field of HIV/AIDS that criminalization may be a deterrent for testing. Yet a simple google search would have given him the very scientific evidence he wants to see. Interestingly, Brent goes on to state with a certain authority that not knowing your status still wouldn't hold up in court because that's considered negligence. There doesn't seem to be any evidence or Canadian judicial precdedent that supports his claim. I am honestly confused by his claim that people would be more afraid to get tested for their own health, rather than legal consequences. Where's the evidence? The bottom line here is that regardless of whether there is a photo of a person alleged to have non-disclosed high risk sexual activities or not, all people who have engaged in any activity that may put them at risk should be tested. Scientific research has shown that the majority of new infections in the MSM population in Canada can be attributed to the 27% of HIV positive people who are unaware of their status (having never been tested) since untreated HIV is considerably more infectious.
Jaysen, Ottawa ON
05/18/10 7:13 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Not to out person,s HIV
I think police should not discose a person,s HIV this should be private health information.How due they really no if this is the right person who gave HIV to sevaral people this has not being proven in court yet with the medical prove. People who spread heptious are not arreasted so why are HIV people treated this way. Also most committe member,s are women not men so there appear,s to be byest belive.
Robert Crevier, Ottawa ontario
05/18/10 7:34 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ont Stats
For anyone looking for up to date stats on testing, incidence, prevalence check; http://www.phs.utoronto.ca/ohemu/mandate.html
Fred, London ON
05/18/10 10:50 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Disagree strongly
I find the complaints against the police absolutely ridiculous, petty -- and counterproductive. I strongly disagree with Dias' viewpoint. He would have police treat the gay community differently from the straight community. Absolutely wrong approach. I WANT the police to treat dangerous and promiscuous men exactly this way. I WANT my right to be protected against people who use sex foolishly. This IS the correct state of the law. this is what cases like Jane Doe stand for. The police conducted themselves absolutely 100% correctly. I grow quite weary of Dias' constant assertion that gay men have to be treated differently because they're inherently promiscuous and unable to control their sexual urges. Utter nonsense. I believe his view damages the gay community in the eyes of the police and in the eyes of the straight community. Gay men should set a higher standard for themselves than Dias' stereotypical embrace of promiscuity as our "one defining factor". It offends deeply. I am quite certain that, if the police had withheld the ID of the alleged criminal, the same people would be complaining that the police apply a double standard with the gay community. The police cannot win when our community is seemingly led by irrational whiners who promote a stereotype (promiscuity) that many of us have worked a lifetime to overcome. Don't pretend to speak for those gays who loathe this selfish, one-dimensional, short-sighted view of what "gay" means.
Adrian, Ottawa Ontario
05/23/10 10:48 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Derek, you are an idiot
Posting someone's picture was not the right thing to do. It does not protect anyone for lots of reasongs: -He is already in custody, he was not going to infect anyone. -What if it was you? what if your pic was posted because you infected someone with herpes, or a cold? Do you deserve to be punished or helped? -What about assuming innocences before claiming him guilty? This is an evil police campaign that works against public health and hurts us all by spreading fear.
Jeff, Ottawa ON
06/02/10 12:30 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Reply to Adrian
I work with Dias on the Anti-HIV project and you are thoroughly mis-interpreting his perspective! Diasis not advocating for special treatment for gay people. What he is advocating for is a police approach that works with Public Health. The police's action were fear based, and caused mis-information about HIV transmission and criminalization. Police need to work with Ottawa Public Health, the province, and community. I would encourage you to contact him directly and ask question as opposed to just spreading such mis-informed opinions.
Juan, Kanata ON
06/02/10 12:39 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.