Associated Press - November 18, 2006

Citing a 1988 Missouri law, attorneys for 40-year-old Albert L. Spicer succeeded in barring two spectators and a reporter Tuesday from a hearing in which the defendant was scheduled to plead guilty to some of the charges.

The state law was intended to protect people who have tested positive for the virus that causes AIDS from suffering discrimination. The law makes police, prosecutors, courts and juries privy to a person's HIV status, but it does not mention the public's right to know.

In court Tuesday, Jackson County Circuit Judge Jay Daugherty delayed Spicer's hearing on Tuesday while he researched the request from Spicer's lawyers before deciding to close the proceedings.

"It was with reluctance that the court had to clear the courtroom in order to comply with the statute," Daugherty said. Before Tuesday, he said, the issue had never been raised by a defendant in his court.

Spicer was charged in October 2004 with two dozen felony counts of recklessly exposing five women in the Kansas City area to HIV by having unprotected sex with them despite knowing he had the virus.

Prosecutors said at the time that one of the women later developed full-blown AIDS.

What happened at Spicer's hearing Tuesday was unknown because of the judge's decision to bar the public. But Spicer was still in custody in Jackson County on Friday, and the charges against him were remained available for public observation on Missouri's court records Web site.

Kansas City lawyer Jean Maneke, who specializes in freedom of information issues, said she had not heard of a court hearing being closed under the HIV statute before now.

"When it's an issue of Missouri constitutional privilege versus a Missouri statute, I think the court might want to err on the side of the constitution," Maneke said.

A spokesman for the Missouri attorney general said that office has not issued an opinion on the issue.

Daugherty on Friday consulted with two of the Legislature's research attorneys. They found nothing in the statute that authorized closing a criminal hearing to the public.

Violators of the confidentiality law can be subject to civil lawsuits, although there is no criminal penalty.

Kansas has a similar privacy law, in which violators can be charged with a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail.

Such privacy laws specific to HIV or AIDS were designed to protect individuals from being discriminated against or stigmatized, said Paul Feldman, deputy director of the nonprofit Health Privacy Project in Washington.

He said the laws also were pushed by public health officials who wanted to encourage people to be more open about getting an HIV test.

061118
AP061136

Copyright © 2006 - Associated Press. Reproduction of this article (other than one copy for personal reference) must be cleared through the AP Permissions Desk.

AEGiS is a 501(c)3, not-for-profit, tax-exempt, educational corporation. AEGiS is made possible through unrestricted funding from Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, Elton John AIDS Foundation, National Library of Medicine, and donations from users like you.

Always watch for outdated information. This article first appeared in 2006. This material is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between you and your doctor.

AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.

Copyright ©1980, 2006. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .