On The Docket
David B. Brushwood, BSPharm, JD
There are many positive stories about pharmacy team members who rose to the occasion and met the public health challenge to immunize patients during the COVID-19 global pandemic. Unfortunately, a small number of stories describe how a relatively few pharmacists took advantage of the pandemic for personal gain. A federal court has upheld the criminal conviction of a pharmacist who stole blank COVID-19 vaccination cards from his pharmacy and sold them on the internet.
Background
Between March 24 and April 23, 2021, the pharmacist sold 630 stolen vaccination cards, raising the price over time from $7.99 per card to $10.99 per card. The pharmacist received at least $5,600 from these internet sales. According to the court, “some people who bought the cards reported doing so out of fear that unvaccinated people might be arrested or that the vaccination cards might be necessary to obtain food.”
A jury found the pharmacist guilty of theft of federal government property in an amount that exceeded $1,000. The pharmacist appealed the verdict, arguing that the cards did not belong to the federal government when he stole them and that they had no value when they were stolen.
Rationale
The court first considered the pharmacist’s argument that he had stolen the cards from the pharmacy, rather than from the United States. The court noted that the key question was “whether the federal government maintained a property interest in the vaccination cards at the time of the theft.” The court explained that the cards were distributed to private entities like pharmacies as part of a government-led program to develop and distribute COVID-19 vaccines as rapidly as possible. The evidence showed that participants in the vaccination program “shared a collective understanding that the cards were government property until they were given to a vaccine recipient.” The director of immunization at the pharmacy from which the cards were stolen testified that “he understood the vaccines and ancillary kits to be property of the federal government because they were provided free of charge.”
The court concluded that “a reasonable jury could find that the vaccination cards were government property at the time of the theft.”
Turning to the value issue, the court explained that there is a heightened penalty for a theft from the federal government that exceeds $1,000. The court acknowledged that “there are a number of different methods of valuation for the purposes of determining whether a violation should be classified and sentenced as a misdemeanor or as a felony.” The court referred to a legal precedent that says, “Measuring value at the time of the defendant’s possession reflects the value that the stolen property fetches on the ‘thieves market,’ which may be substantially higher than other measures of value.”
The court reasoned that “determining value at the time of possession was particularly appropriate in this case” because the card’s value on the internet was substantially higher than the per-unit cost that the government paid to produce the cards, which it provided for free to the pharmacy.
The pharmacist’s conviction was affirmed.
Takeaways
It is rare that during a public health crisis a pharmacist will prey on the fears of vulnerable people. But it is not impossible, as this case demonstrates. The unfortunate message of this case is that pharmacists must provide useful public health measures for patients who need them and also prevent the exploitation of patients by malevolent colleagues. Any observed potentially criminal activity by a pharmacy team member must be reported immediately to management.
Pharmacists whose beliefs are contrary to public health measures that are accepted by the profession are free to join a practice site where those beliefs may be irrelevant or even tolerated. Unscientific beliefs cannot support any activities that are based on misguided expressions of civil disobedience. Criminal acts that sabotage public health measures will be punished. ■