This is not a case that you want to take before a jury. Ronald Eugene Robinson, 35, in Jacksonville, Florida is accused of using enemas and then returning the “pre-packaged CVS Pharmacy Ready-to-Use enemas” to the shelves of a CVS pharmacy. What is most interesting about this case (ok one of the most interesting things) is that this is a federal case since the incident is being treated as product tampering.
It seems likely that he was after the refund since people who engage in criminal tampering often try to return products without being detected. In this case, pharmacy worker, Dustin McDonald, told police that Robinson told him that he bought the enema for his mother who no longer needed them. Suspicious, he decided “check the box of enemas” and “observed that all the enemas were used.” He found that someone had “re-glued the bottom of the box so that it appeared that it had not been opened.” However, the indictment says that other enemas were subsequently sold to unsuspecting customers, who have been notified by letter. Now that would be quite a letter to receive.
Robinson is charged with acting with “reckless disregard” and placed others “in danger of death or bodily injury.” He could received a maximum of ten years in prison and a $250,000 fine. That may seem a bit unlikely for a refund fraud (with risk to others) but Robinson also has a lengthy rap sheet including arrests for burglary, battery, passing bad checks, damage to property, and criminal mischief.
My main interest is the liability for CVS. If anyone used these products, it would seem a remarkably strong case for negligent infliction of emotional distress as well as straight negligence. In addition, if a jury determines that the tampering should have been detected with simple inspection, there could be a demand for punitive damages.
On the criminal side, how long do you think Robinson should get for such an alleged crime?