the practice. For the same reason, he had not written the instruction for daily distribution on the prescription proper. Dr Rossouw’s prescription was not addressed to any particular pharmacist. Thus it was that the deceased could have had the prescription filled at any pharmacy. However, Dr Rossouw expected that the prescription would be filled at the same pharmacy with which Connell had his daily distribution arrangement, namely the Monarch Pharmacy at Westlands. Indeed, although he acknowledged that the script could have been taken to any pharmacist, he was quite clear that there had been some discussion to the effect that they would go the Monarch Pharmacy at Westlands. He said he would have expected the pharmacy to have retained the portion of the document that bore the written instruction. He said: 'If he received it definitely, he must have it.' (T511) He said that in accordance with the usual practice, his expectation was that the pharmacy would contact him. He did not telephone the pharmacist to explain the arrangement and he did not receive any communication from a pharmacist in relation to the deceased’s prescription. In the event, the prescription was not filled at the Monarch Pharmacy at Westlands. It was filled at the Monarch Pharmacy in Playford Avenue, Whyalla. I have already referred to the fact that 50 capsules were given to the deceased on 27 June and the remaining 50 were given to him the following day. This distribution would have been contrary to the written instruction Dr Rossouw said he had placed on the blank section of the document. The manager of the Playford Avenue pharmacy, Glenys Thompson, was called to give evidence at the inquest. She provided the prescription (Exhibit C49) to the police during the course of their investigation. The prescription does not have the blank section of the original A4 document attached and so it does not bear the instruction as to daily dispensation that Dr Rossouw claims the whole document originally bore. Ms Thompson remembered the deceased. From time to time the deceased had brought in prescriptions from his general practitioner, a Dr Connelly. I gained the impression that Ms Thompson was a responsible pharmacist. She told me, and I have no reason to disbelieve her, of her having contacted Dr Connelly and having told him that the arrangement by which the deceased had been collecting his medication for
the practice. For the same reason, he had not written the instruction for daily distribution on the prescription proper. Dr Rossouw’s prescription was not addressed to any particular pharmacist. Thus it was that the deceased could have had the prescription filled at any pharmacy. However, Dr Rossouw expected that the prescription would be filled at the same pharmacy with which Connell had his daily distribution arrangement, namely the Monarch Pharmacy at Westlands. Indeed, although he acknowledged that the script could have been taken to any pharmacist, he was quite clear that there had been some discussion to the effect that they would go the Monarch Pharmacy at Westlands. He said he would have expected the pharmacy to have retained the portion of the document that bore the written instruction. He said: 'If he received it definitely, he must have it.' (T511) He said that in accordance with the usual practice, his expectation was that the pharmacy would contact him. He did not telephone the pharmacist to explain the arrangement and he did not receive any communication from a pharmacist in relation to the deceased’s prescription. In the event, the prescription was not filled at the Monarch Pharmacy at Westlands. It was filled at the Monarch Pharmacy in Playford Avenue, Whyalla. I have already referred to the fact that 50 capsules were given to the deceased on 27 June and the remaining 50 were given to him the following day. This distribution would have been contrary to the written instruction Dr Rossouw said he had placed on the blank section of the document. The manager of the Playford Avenue pharmacy, Glenys Thompson, was called to give evidence at the inquest. She provided the prescription (Exhibit C49) to the police during the course of their investigation. The prescription does not have the blank section of the original A4 document attached and so it does not bear the instruction as to daily dispensation that Dr Rossouw claims the whole document originally bore. Ms Thompson remembered the deceased. From time to time the deceased had brought in prescriptions from his general practitioner, a Dr Connelly. I gained the impression that Ms Thompson was a responsible pharmacist. She told me, and I have no reason to disbelieve her, of her having contacted Dr Connelly and having told him that the arrangement by which the deceased had been collecting his medication for
ROGERS%20Justin%20Malcolm.docx