A singer from the German girl band No Angels has admitted to having unprotected sex with several partners without warning them that she was HIV-positive.

Nadja Benaissa, 28, was speaking at the opening of her trial in the German city of Darmstadt.

"I am so sorry," she told the court.

She faces charges of grievous bodily harm for allegedly infecting one man, and attempted bodily harm over two men who were not infected.

If convicted, Ms Benaissa faces a prison sentence ranging from six months to 10 years.

She claims she didn't intend to hurt anyone, but the fact remains she was aware of her infection but still chose not to warn her sexual partners first. At best that's misguided, at worst it's criminally negligent.

Yep. That is what the court is currently trying to decide...

It is not something that I could decide.

Really? It seems rather easy to me. You were aware that you had HIV, you did not warn the other person, the other person now has a fatal illness = guilty. Next.

Yes but people do not think when sex is involved. They get caught up in the passion. Rationality goes out of the window. That is why I cant decide.

Yes but people do not think when sex is involved. They get caught up in the passion. Rationality goes out of the window. That is why I cant decide.

We don't allow that as a defense, generally speaking. The 'crime of passion' defense is a myth. Legally, you are responsible for your own actions, unless you can prove you were actually clinically insane at the time.

Lots of people have unprotected sex when they shouldn't - that's just a fact of life, if you'll excuse the pun. However once you know you're HIV positive, you gain an extra responsibility. One of the fundamental bases of law is that you should not do something which you know will bring harm to another. That includes sleeping with them in this case.

I did see a news report which suggested the woman had been told the chances of her passing on her condition to a man was very very small so she thought it was OK. That suggests she's an idiot rather than malicious. The thing I'm not sure about is this - the accusation seems to be she had unprotected sex with three men after finding out she was HIV+. What I don't remember hearing is whether any of those men were actually infected or not as a result. Surely the offense becomes much more serious if she has passed on the infection, rather just than she might have?

We don't allow that as a defense, generally speaking. The 'crime of passion' defense is a myth. Legally, you are responsible for your own actions, unless you can prove you were actually clinically insane at the time.