this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2024
285 points (98.6% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2659 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 142 points 2 months ago (3 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 72 points 2 months ago

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

[–] [email protected] 45 points 2 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What, you don't recall COVID-99?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I heard it made computers cough on nye

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago (3 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

Public health is a privacy exception.