Some of the jurors who imposed the death penalty on Charles Rhines, who was convicted of murder, have said they thought the alternative — a life sentence served in a men’s prison — was something he would enjoy as a gay man.
During deliberations, the jury had often discussed the fact that Mr. Rhines was gay and there was “a lot of disgust” about it, one juror recalled in an interview, according to the court petition. Another said that jurors knew he was gay and “thought that he shouldn’t be able to spend his life with men in prison.” A third recounted hearing that if the jury did not sentence Mr. Rhines to death, “if he’s gay, we’d be sending him where he wants to go.”
The justices rejected Mr. Rhines’s plea to hear his bias claim, allowing his death sentence to stand despite disturbing evidence that it may have been the result of anti-L.G.B.T. animus. As usual, the court gave no explanation for its decision not to review the case. But its silence sent a deeply troubling message about the value placed on the lives of L.G.B.T. people.
More you might like
The article says that the guidelines have been updated. Instead of asking if you’re a man that’s had sex with another man in the past 3 months it asks everyone regardless of gender if they’ve had anal sex with a new partner or if they’ve had anal sex with multiple partners in the past 3 months.
This both opens up blood donation to msm in exclusive relationships or who don’t have anal sex and more accurately identifies hiv risk from people who aren’t msm. This is exactly the sort of guidelines we’ve been fighting for for years. This is a major win for both gay rights and blood donation in the US. Now a bunch of people who couldn’t donate before can donate now.














summer-skye-64