1

The Case of The Teary Druggist

Student’s Name

Institution affiliation
Course
Date
 2

Based on the instance, the pharmacist would be levied with unintentional murder. The

pharmacist did not know that the system operations would fail and the activities of the medical

professionals would facilitate the death of a patient. Unintended murder seems relevant in the

case since the pharmacist's actions did not directly lead to the end of the patient. However, the

pharmacist was in charge of offering correct medication to jerry, the patient. A pharmacist

supervisor's core responsibility is to ensure that the medical professionals within a particular

medical Centre offer quality treatment to patients and their actions do not affect the patients

(Hofford,2019). Therefore, the pharmacist did not carry out his responsibilities; thus and

adequately, his actions were intentional; hence scandalous allegations of the involuntary murder

are applicable in the case.

The legal team would present these allegations on behalf of the family of the patient.

After the death of a patient, her family filed a claim seeking comprehensive training from

medical professionals. Since the end of Jerry was facilitated by the error that the medical

professionals could avoid (Levmore,2019). The judge assessed the allegations presented on

involuntary murder and the evidence of the instance. In the case, the atrocity of negligence

would be `presented against the pharmacist because the pharmacist could have shunned the

incidence, therefore indicating that he was negligent in carrying his responsibilities. The

negligence conditions apply in this instance, including the aspect of commitment displayed by

the pharmacist failing to respond to the incidence on time. The pharmacist was supposed to

direct the medical professionals on proper treatment care, but he assumed that the medical

professionals would offer correct medication. Therefore, in this regard, the pharmacist breached

the responsibility to enforce supervisory duties.

 3

Breaching his supervisory roles led to the damage resulting. The negligence claim would

be presented to the pharmacist since he did not respond appropriately to his position. Among the

principles of negligence in breach of law is that accused should incur the painful responsibility of

care (Hofford,2019). The pharmacist incurred the relatives of the patient a role of respect for

their child. The relatives of the patient trusted the medical personnel with the care of Jerry but

instead, the medical staff violated the responsibility of care, thus causing the death of their child.

The family of Jerry is rightful to sue the hospital for the end of their child. Hospitals are

institutions comprising many departments. Thus, supervisors are most likely to be held

responsible while such incidences occur.

The standard proof needed to obtain the sentiment for the scandalous case is the

intentional coherent of the pharmacist's actions (Levmore,2019). Therefore, for the court to bring

the criminal allegations on involuntary murder, it should ensure that the pharmacist's actions

were not intentional. The pharmacist should provide evidence that he was not aware of the

medical personalities court's activities and find proof of the breach of negligence, which is

relevant to the case. These proofs can be acquired by analyzing the duties of the supervisor

pharmacist in the hospitals.

 4

References

Hofford, S., 2019. Corporate Homicide/Manslaughter; Symbolic or Purely Instrumental. Aberd.

Stud. Rev 9, 37.

Levmore, S., 2019. Richard Posner, the Decline of the Common Law, and the Negligence

Principle. Univ. Chic. Law Rev. 86, 1137–1156.