Section 961.452 - Defenses in certain schedule V prosecutions(1) A person who proves all of the following by a preponderance of the evidence has a defense to prosecution under s. 961.41(1) (j) that is based on the person's violation of a condition specified in s. 961.23 with respect to the person's distribution or delivery of a pseudoephedrine product: (a) The person did not knowingly or recklessly violate the condition under s. 961.23.(b) The person reported his or her own violation of the condition under s. 961.23 to a law enforcement officer in the county or municipality in which the violation occurred within 30 days after the violation.(2) A seller who proves all of the following by a preponderance of the evidence has a defense to prosecution under s. 961.41(1) (j) that is based on the person's violation of a condition specified in s. 961.23 with respect to the person's distribution or delivery of a pseudoephedrine product: (a) The person did not knowingly or recklessly violate the condition under s. 961.23.(b) The acts or omissions constituting the violation of the condition under s. 961.23 were the acts or omissions of one or more of the person's employees.(c) The person provided training to each of those employees regarding the restrictions imposed under s. 961.23 on the delivery of pseudoephedrine products.(3) A person who proves all of the following by a preponderance of the evidence has a defense to prosecution under s. 961.41(1) (j) for a violation of s. 961.23(6): (a) The purchaser presented an identification card that contained a name or address other than the person's own.(b) The appearance of the purchaser was such that an ordinary and prudent person would believe that the purchaser was the person depicted in the photograph contained in that identification card.(c) The sale was made in good faith, in reasonable reliance on the identification card and appearance of the purchaser, and with the belief that the name and address of the purchaser were as listed on the identification card.(4) A person who proves all of the following by a preponderance of the evidence has a defense to prosecution under s. 961.41(1) (j) for a violation of s. 961.23(8): (a) The purchaser presented an identification card that indicated that he or she was 18 years of age or older.(b) The appearance of the purchaser was such that an ordinary and prudent person would believe that the purchaser was 18 years of age or older.(c) The sale was made in good faith, in reasonable reliance on the identification card and appearance of the purchaser, and with the belief that the purchaser was 18 years of age or older.