Ten shots in a single chug, after drinking heavily for three hours.
Normally I’d fault the drinker but in this case he was drinking 3 hrs prior to:
- drinking a beer with a shot
- drinking another beer with 2 shots
- a series of 8 to 10 shots all at once
The bartender can’t be expected to count each drink but should generally be aware of how long a patron has been in the bar. In this case, the person had already consumed a considerable amount of alcohol and the last round of drinks were requested by someone with a diminished capacity to reason the consequences. Normally this would be an incremental decision to make by the bartender but in this case it was obviously too much alcohol to serve.
Finally, by placing the patron in a side room the bar took on an additional level of responsibility and should have checked on the patron.
My father was a bar manager (I studied part of the license with him)
I tended bar for a bit
I have drunk shots on more than a couple of occasions.
A charge of manslaughter (or similiar) is not unwarranted here - I think it’s about right.
300 - old mls of Vodka is rather a lot for a single drink that is “sculled”. I would have a more lenient attitude if it had been a yard glass (which would be a roughly equivalent amount of alcohol) but let’s not dive into that.
The bartender and the manager both explicitly approved it (they weren’t hoodwinked in any way)
As to leaving the guy in the conference room - while “not nice” I don’t think it’s criminal for the simple reason that if the death was from alcohol poisoning I don’t see that the result would be any different if he had been sleeping alone in his room.
I don’t know if there’re such laws in Anglo-Saxon legal systems, but here we have a crime called “non-assistance to person in danger”. It nominally covers such things as hit-and-runs or passing by the site of an accident and not stopping to see if anyone needs help, but I think it would apply here too.
But in any case, when someone goes unconscious you don’t just let them “sleep it off”, you call the EMTs immediately, period. Any barkeep should know this. Intubation and pumping his stomach in time would presumably have saved the guy.
This seems pretty unenforceable to me. Not everyone gets drunk the same way - not everyone has the same tolerance (obviously) or acts the same when drunk. Are you supposed to Breathalyze each patron? And what level of drunkenness are we talking about - the blood alcohol level for driving is pretty low (as it should be), should it be that? Twice that? And what about situations like stag or hen parties, which often involve going place to place and having a few shots? Sometimes people show up seeming quite sober, and you serve them a shot, and shortly after all those previous shots at other establishments kick in.
When looking at the case in the OP, however, it looks like everyone deserves a bit of blame. Mostly the dead guy, and he’s paid his price.
That sounds like the illegality is on the part of the drinker.
What they did was put a poisoned person in a room alone. While they certainly thought in terms of letting the person sleep it off they should have known better. And it would have been no different if they dragged the man back to his room. He was in need of medical attention either way.
Sounds like it, but the liability is on the bar staff/owner. It’s not a rigorously enforced law.
The question I would ask back would be along the lines of “did they know, or could they reasonably have known he was poisoned”?
Was he completely unconscious or more kinda drunken sleepy?
I’ve put drunk, incoherent people to bed before - never someone totally flaked out, are you saying that there, but for the grace of god I could have gone?
To me, the massive screw up here is the barman and the manager - anybody in that sort of position can and should be reasonably expected to know the outcome of drinking so much in a single drink.
I realize it’s kind of late, but the OP quoted most of the relevant newspaper article in that first post. I’ve shortened the text in the post.
Yah, I’d have to think a bartender and a bar manager would know the outcome of so much alcohol quickly added to someone who has been drinking.
I’m not sure I understand the reason for this bartender liability/dram shop law. I can go to the liquor store and buy a case of whiskey, sit at home and drink until I die, or even before I pass out go out and drive and kill someone. All completely unsupervised. The liquor store is not at fault because they sold a legal product.
But if I have a couple of drinks in a bar, they have to monitor me to make sure I am not doing anything that would harm me or others? I think it puts the blame on the wrong party.
Unlike a liquor store, a batman has the right and ability to monitor and control excessive consumption on the premises and also derives a financial benefit from excessive consumption. sounds like a form of traditional common law secondary liability.
The purchase of a case of liquor does not imply intent to consume it all at once. In a bar, purchasing a drink implies consumption of the drink (unless buying a round of drinks for other people).
And the liquor store clerk is also equally not permitted to sell alcohol to someone also already intoxicated.
See, this kind of rung is why the Darwin awards are misnamed. If only people’s stupidity would kill them off quicker. But the deceased in this case is being mourned as a “father of two,” which means he’s already had the chance to pass in the stupid to the next generation.
And I will also say Batman has many more important responsibilities in Gotham City than monitoring individual alcohol consumption in bars.