What was the result in the case of U.S.v.Park,the case in which the defendant,the president of a national food-chain corporation,claimed he should not be held liable for allowing food in a warehouse to be exposed to rodent contamination because he had delegated responsibility to subordinates?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)According to the court,"[I]t is … clear that the Government established a prima facie case when it introduced evidence sufficient to warrant a finding by the trier of the facts that the defendant had,by reason of his position in the corporation,responsibility and authority either to prevent in the first instance,or promptly to correct,the violation complained of,and that he failed to do so."
B)According to the court,"[I]t is … clear that the Government established a prima facie case when it introduced evidence sufficient to warrant a finding by the trier of the facts that the defendant had,by reason of his position in the corporation,responsibility and authority either to prevent in the first instance,or promptly to correct,the violation complained of,and that he failed to do so."
C)According to the court,"[I]t is … clear that the Government established a prima facie case when it introduced evidence sufficient to warrant a finding by the trier of the facts that the defendant had,by reason of his position in the corporation,responsibility and authority either to prevent in the first instance,or promptly to correct,the violation complained of,and that he failed to do so."
D)According to the court,"[I]t is … clear that the Government established a prima facie case when it introduced evidence sufficient to warrant a finding by the trier of the facts that the defendant had,by reason of his position in the corporation,responsibility and authority either to prevent in the first instance,or promptly to correct,the violation complained of,and that he failed to do so."
E)According to the court,"[I]t is … clear that the Government established a prima facie case when it introduced evidence sufficient to warrant a finding by the trier of the facts that the defendant had,by reason of his position in the corporation,responsibility and authority either to prevent in the first instance,or promptly to correct,the violation complained of,and that he failed to do so."

What Was the Result in the Case of U