Question

In the United States v. Park, was this corporate executive defendant held criminally liable for failing to ensure the company's compliance with the law?a. That the defendant could not be held liable because it could not be proven by a reasonable doubt that he knew warehouse employees were failing to take proper steps to ensure sanitary conditionsb. That the defendant could not be held liable because it could not be proven by a preponderance of the evidence that he knew warehouse employees were failing to take proper steps to insure sanitary conditionsc. That the defendant could not be held liable because he did not personally cause the contaminationd. That the defendant could be held liable because he hid evidence of the offensese. That the defendant could be held liable because he failed to see that those delegated the duty to ensure sanitary conditions did their job

Answer 1

The answer is letter E.

Step-by-step explanation:

That the defendant could be held liable because he failed to see that those delegated the duty to ensure sanitary conditions did their job.