The adult film site Blake Mason has removed all videos featuring Daryll Rowe, the Scottish hairdresser who was sentenced to life in prison last month after deliberately infecting five men with HIV.
Rowe appeared as Benjamin York in a handful of films for the studio between 2014 and 2015. His Blake Mason bio read: “This buff Scottish guy is so hot we could film him for days and never get bored.”
During his trial, which received international attention, it was discovered that Rowe attempted to infect five other men by tampering with condoms after they wouldn’t have bareback sex with him.
After infecting his partners, he sent cruel messages to his victims. One of the messages read: “Maybe you have the fever cos I came inside you and I have HIV, lol. Whoops!”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
One of Rowe’s victims told The Scottish Sun: “It’s pretty disgusting that sites are still trying to make money from them.”
The man added: “They should be taken down as a courtesy to people like me.”
Blake Mason has not released any comment over its decision to pull Rowe’s videos from the site, though we’d say it was a good call on its part.
Rowe, who first discovered he was HIV positive in 2015, will spend a minimum of 10 years in prison.
h/t: GayStarNews
Vince
I had no idea that any sites were still making $ off this Douchebag. These are the examples where I support prison.
Navalator
Only 10 years? He should get life for attempted murder.
Coreydnyc
The article says life at the start , then a minimum of 10 at the end. maybe they mean 10yrs to life? no idea
Brexit
For clarification, where a life sentence is given, the judge may recommend the minimum term (or tariff) to be served before the prisoner becomes eligible for parole. Whole life orders (or tariffs) are only used in exceptional cases. England & Wales used to have a life sentence “imprisonment for public protection” for crimes that were not serious enough to merit a normal life sentence but where the prisoner was considered a danger to the public and so should not be released until the Parole Board had decided that they no longer represented a risk. However, this type of sentence was abolished at the end of 2012.
martin_erickson
Life.
Vince
He’s kind of a worst case scenario. I can see guys being unsafe with him just based on his looks. I doubt condoms were even discussed.
DCguy
He admitted to sabatoging condoms. They were discussed, he wore them then mocked the victims afterwards. When the police caught him, they found multiple condoms that had holes poked in them.
Hillers
This is the kind of shit that makes just want to cancel my membership and run far, far away.
LABrad
Like it or not, accusations and convictions like this are disturbing for many reasons. They set dangerous precedents. Anyone can just accuse anybody. There is no way to prove any of this. There are so many variables. We have no way of even knowing if he actually infected anyone. It’s pure speculation. It was wrong to criminally charge him.
Phil H
He literally sent a guy he had a fucked a message saying “I’m riddled”, he sent another a message saying “I have HIV. LOL. Oops”. After being arrested and bailed he went on the run and changed his name before continuing to try and deliberately infect men, often by removing or sabotaging a condom, in another part of the country.
I don’t support HIV stigma, and have had many partners who are HIV positive, but this guy is not a victim.
dwes09
Did you even read the article?
The men in question obviously adhered to safe sex guidelines (though did not use PrEP, which is understandable, given the expense and probable long term effects). Rowe ADMITTED to poking holes in condoms, and gloated about it in messages later.
And though I don’t know if this was done: given the broad range of DNA in HIV, it is possible to identify strains and connect them to individuals.
What seems disturbing to me is your eagerness to ignore actual evidence of intent and jump to conclusions with very little of the information used in trial. This is not criminalizing HIV or HIV positive people, it is one specific man who acted out of low integrity and ethics.
dwes09
(actually that should possibly be RNA, notDNA?)
LABrad
dwes09 Yes of course I read it. I wouldn’t have commented otherwise.
First, they said he infected 5 men. Then they said he “attempted” to infect them. That’s a big difference.
Do they even know if he actually has hiv? Do they know if he was even contagious? Did they test the 5 other guys? Even if they were poz, they could’ve been poz before they met him.
They don’t even know if he actually had sex with them at all. There was 1 alleged text message? Even if it was real, it doesn’t even really say anything…. and so on and so on……
Obviously, we have almost no information about this case…. but from what we do know… it’s pretty flimsy. And remember, things are not always as they appear on the surface.
Goforit
LABrad: Get your money back from Evelyn Wood. “During his trial, which received international attention, it was discovered that Rowe attempted to infect five other men by tampering with condoms after they wouldn’t have bareback sex with him.”
If you look really hard, you might notice that the article states “five other men.”
Dwes09: Welcome back. I miss you when you take a leave. I thought you might get the reference to Evelyn Wood. I doubt Brad will.
DCguy
Why are people showing up on this post that keep trying to change the story? First saying condoms weren’t discussed, now trying to pretend there isn’t a mountain of evidence against this guy.
SamDixon3972
So you would want to free a guy from jail:
a) who is HIV-positive that has admitted that he deliberately infected five men with HIV by tampering with the condoms (after agreeing to use condoms in the sex with guys who would not have bareback sex with him).
b) contacted those very same sex partners afterward with cruel messages that, mocked, taunted and expressed his gladness that he infected his sex partners.
c) had in his home multiple condoms that were tampered with, which he himself admitted in court.
d) who after being arrested skipped bail went on the run and attempted to infect other men in the same way in another part of the country, placing in jeopardy who ever put up the money to bail him out.
e) Then you proceed to call the men – who were infected by this guy – “sluts” – adding in your own words, “who became HIV poz due to their own indiscretion.” Talk about blaming the victims. (I’m just guessing here that maybe you would call women who were raped as “asking for it.” Just wondering.)
He INTENDED to infect his sex partners – there is no other way to express this – that is the very definition of a criminal act.
So you would want to free a guy from jail simply because his is “good-looking.” I’m sorry good looks can fade but evilness remains true to the core.
Locking him up will not reverse what happened to his victims, but will a) provide the victims peace of mind that something was done to prevent other victims of this guy, b) will give this guy time to reflect upon his actions that have reduced his freedom, c) express the outrage of society concerning this guy’s actions, and d) lastly strongly suggest that such actions not be taken by other men.
Yes, plenty of people have become infected with HIV even when doing their best to take precautions, or before better knowledge, drugs and other efforts have become available. There is however a big difference when someone intentionally wishes to infect others, does indeed infect others, and then mocks their victims afterward.
The most mind-boggling part is that you would want to free this guy because he is “good-looking”. Wow!!!
Toofie
Right. If he looked like Quasimodo they would either not comment or want a stiffer penalty.
drelocks15
I’m way more surprised that some posters are shocked by what he posted. it’s not like gays aren’t the MOST superficial people on the planet….even when it comes to prison sentences.
Cylest Brooks
I removed the comment you’re referencing, FYI. Good points here.
Toofie
Good! You did us all a favor!
okiloki
So he shouldn’t go to prison because he’s hot? You seriously have messed up priorities and morals.
chris33133
Back at the start and on-past the height of the HIV crisis, some gay men purposely infected others. Among the reasons that I read as given were: anger; to spread the illness in an effort to make it so widespread people would have to take notice and act; dementia caused by AIDS’ progress; even self-loathing and guilt as well as a concoction of other given reasons. Even back then, I remember thinking that it may explain why people did what they did; but (with the exception of dementia) it didn’t excuse it.
Today, when medications are available throughout the developed world that can render HIV undetectable and when there are so many ways of getting support and help to deal with one’s own issues, I can think of absolutely no acceptable reason for what this guy did.
As for the people who would place the burden/blame on this guy’s partners: get real. They negotiated safe-sex practices as a condition of consent. Lack of consent is called “rape.” And from where I stand, that is exactly what this guy did.
Bromancer7
Had these guys been taking PrEP in addition to using condoms none of them would have gotten infected. Just sayin’
Vince
I believe the prep is not obtainable through their National Healthcare System.
Phil H
PrEP didn’t become readily available in Scotland until mid 2016 and then England in late 2017, by which time he’d already infected the men involved. Also, that’s a nice bit of victim blaming right there. It’s people’s choice to take PrEP or not, however none of them chose for him to lie about his status and sabotage condoms in an attempt to deliberately infect them.
CastleSF
I am not saying that he should get out of this ordeal scotch free but 2 years in prison plus community service seems reasonable. What I find hard to determine is, how did court know definitively that these non-celibate “victims” got HIV from this hair dresser? It is a given that they, including the offender, have all been sleeping around and lived a less than virtuous lifestyle. That is the consequence of behaviors of every single one of them.
Troyfight
….wrong, CastleSF….wondering if you are don’t believe your own grievous words, and simply trying to incite others.
Curtispsf
I call Russian troll. Or if not an “actual Russian troll”, I call “intent to incite like a Russian troll”. Otherwise, you’re one seriously F’ed up person. “Your honor”, said the attorney. “I would like to file an appeal of the sentence. My client is too good looking to languish in prison” The Court: “We’re sure that your client will have his hands full, and his mouth and his arse, too.”
CastleSF
How unbelievably disgusting your imagination is. No matter what my political persuasion is, I’ll never condone prison rape like you do.
DCguy
So what if locking him up doesn’t reverse the HIV he gave to his victims? People aren’t jailed to reverse time and cure what they’ve done. They’re jailed to punish them for what they did.