Alex operates a vending machine that sells beverages in a state where selling beverages containing high levels of caffeine to minors is prohibited under strict liability statutes. One day, a minor purchases a drink from Alex’s machine. At trial, Alex claims he had no way of verifying the age of buyers and relied on the vending machine’s age verification system. To successfully defend against the charge, Alex must demonstrate that:
The minor knowingly circumvented the age verification system on the vending machine.
He did not intend to sell beverages to minors.
He used an age verification system to check the buyer's age.
He believed the buyer was of legal age based on available information.
The correct answer involves showing that Alex used an age verification system to check the buyer's age, which aligns with defenses available in strict liability offenses. This defense is pertinent because strict liability does not require mens rea, but compliance with statutory requirements can negate liability. The other choices incorrectly focus on intent or belief, which are not relevant under strict liability.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is strict liability in legal terms?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What does it mean to have an age verification system in place?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the implications of relying on an age verification system?