Austrian woman is found guilty of fatally infecting her neighbor with COVID-19 (apnews.com)
from MicroWave@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 10:24
https://lemmy.world/post/19790130

A woman in Austria was found guilty of fatally infecting her neighbor with COVID-19 in 2021, her second pandemic-related conviction in a year, according to local media. A judge sentenced the 54-year-old on Thursday to four months’ suspended imprisonment and an 800-euro fine ($886.75) for grossly negligent homicide.

The victim, who was also a cancer patient, died of pneumonia that was caused by the coronavirus, according to Austrian news agency APA. A virological report showed that the virus DNA matched both the deceased and the 54-year-old woman, proving that the defendant “almost 100 percent” transmitted it, an expert told the court.

“I feel sorry for you personally – I think that something like this has probably happened hundreds of times,” the judge said Thursday. “But you are unlucky that an expert has determined with almost absolute certainty that it was an infection that came from you.”

#world

threaded - newest

MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 10:25 next collapse
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for Associated Press:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://apnews.com/article/austria-covid-conviction-court-coronavirus-ef341c5f6714526f05c67662a94eeb13

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

ayyy@sh.itjust.works on 16 Sep 2024 02:19 collapse

Ah yes, that leftist rag the Associated Press. Why is this propaganda bot allowed still?

FlyingSquid@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 11:00 next collapse

The most relevant part of the article, to me, has not been quoted:

This week, the judge heard statements from the deceased’s family, who said there had been contact in a stairwell between the neighbors on Dec. 21, 2001 — when the defendant would already have known she had COVID-19. But she denied the meeting, saying she was too sick to get out of bed that day. She also said she believed she had bronchitis, which she typically gets every year.

But the woman’s doctor told police that the defendant had tested positive with a rapid test and told him that she “certainly won’t let herself be locked up” after the result.

Seems pretty open-and-shut to me. If she had something like drug-resistant TB, there would be no question here.

Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 11:24 next collapse

With that context, 4 months and $800 doesn’t feel like enough

breakingcups@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 11:46 next collapse

Huh, I’m surprised the doctor was allowed to comment on that.

RedWeasel@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 12:35 next collapse

Why? There a limits on health care privacy privilege. Also with regards to with attorneys as well.

The_v@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 19:18 collapse

Medical privacy ends when the condition may cause detrimental effects to other people. It’s not that difficult of a concept to understand.

Somebody who has epilepsy is not allowed to drive vehicles or fly a plane. They might have an episode while operating the vehicle and kill/injure others.

Somebody with a confirmed deadly disease is not allowed to wander around spreading it to others. Their decisions to ignore quarantine restrictions will kill/injure others.

todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee on 15 Sep 2024 15:05 next collapse

Welcome to a world without medical privacy.

In the USA this wouldn’t happen because we have HIPAA.

We also used to have Roe v. Wade…

bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net on 15 Sep 2024 22:29 collapse

This is a brain-dead take when the USA has prosecuted people for intentionally spreading diseases.

stoly@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 15:51 collapse

Public health is a privacy exception.

fistac0rpse@fedia.io on 15 Sep 2024 12:04 collapse

Dec. 21, 2001 - do news sites no longer employ editors or proofreaders?

Damage@feddit.it on 15 Sep 2024 16:07 next collapse

What, you don’t recall COVID-99?

Noodle07@lemmy.world on 19 Sep 2024 08:08 collapse

I heard it made computers cough on nye

Drusas@fedia.io on 15 Sep 2024 20:17 collapse

They almost all stopped doing so some years back. As someone who used to want to be a copywriter, reading modern articles with all of their constant mistakes is very frustrating.

ulterno@lemmy.kde.social on 15 Sep 2024 11:45 next collapse

So, unless you die of it, there are no repercussions to someone blatantly coughing at your face, again and again, despite protests.

I don’t feel sorry for anyone doing that.

foggy@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 11:50 next collapse

Coughing deliberately in someones face can be battery in many states with a good lawyer.

ulterno@lemmy.kde.social on 15 Sep 2024 12:04 collapse

In India, if I call out someone for coughing in my face, IATA.

Rivalarrival@lemmy.today on 15 Sep 2024 19:03 next collapse

Well, no repercussions from the government. But the government is not the only entity capable of creating repercussions.

ms_lane@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 22:13 collapse

Seems there are no real repercussions at all.

800 euro and 4 weeks at home?

lol_idk@lemmy.ml on 15 Sep 2024 15:49 next collapse

Deleted

Valmond@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 17:53 collapse

Except if she does it again, right?

Drusas@fedia.io on 15 Sep 2024 20:16 collapse

Third time's a charm?

lol_idk@lemmy.ml on 16 Sep 2024 02:16 collapse

Deleted

anubis119@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 16:54 next collapse

I understand the reasoning, I’m just not sure I like the precedence this establishes. The details are quite vague.

The article says there was contact in a stairwell. What kind of contact? How long? Even if you got your groceries delivered, how would you get them if you aren’t allowed in a common area? No details at all.

This feels dystopian to me because the judgement seems to imply that if you are unlucky enough to have a better immune system than your deceased neighbor who was sick with the same strain of virus, that you’re fully liable for their death. IDK

cmeio@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 17:30 next collapse

To give a bit nore details: She ignored her quarantine mandate, didn’t wear a mask and chatted him up in the stairwell. Because she was convinced she doesn’t have Covid even though she was diagnosed.

Crashumbc@lemmy.world on 16 Sep 2024 00:21 collapse

Sounds like typhoid Mary

Drusas@fedia.io on 15 Sep 2024 20:16 collapse

She also has a previous conviction for intentionally spreading the virus.

catloaf@lemm.ee on 15 Sep 2024 23:06 collapse

Then why the fuck is this one suspended?

Drusas@fedia.io on 15 Sep 2024 23:17 collapse

Good question, isn't it.

kerrypacker@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 18:09 next collapse

Almost absolute certainty? So not?

Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works on 15 Sep 2024 18:42 next collapse

For months and under $1000 for murdering someone. That’s really not going to stop anyone doing it again.

Rivalarrival@lemmy.today on 15 Sep 2024 19:08 next collapse

Suspended sentence. She only spends 4 months in jail if she breaks the law again.

13esq@lemmy.world on 16 Sep 2024 06:48 collapse

Murder implies intent. If the assailant, knowing they had COVID, purposefully coughed in to the face of the victim with the intent of infecting them, then you have a point. But the article does not imply that is what happened.

Feathercrown@lemmy.world on 15 Sep 2024 19:06 collapse

Literally how do you even get access to a syringe of covid-19

Edit: Oh, “infecting”…