Altra_Shadowstalker
Posts:
17,553
Registered:
Jan 17, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 16,076
User ID: 616,837
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
While we're on the topic of morality, I thought it might be interesting to pose this dilemma.
4 men are shipwrecked and survive together on a life boat for fifteen days (they had food enough for about five). On the fifteenth day, things are looking grim, the inexperienced sailor, Parker, drank sea water which is commonly known to be fatal, and everyone had already resorted to drinking their own urine. The Captain, Dudley, and his mate, Stephens, bring up drawing straws to see who would sacrifice himself to be eaten. Brooks objects to this and they decide to hold off on it.
That night Stephens and Dudley decide to kill the comatose Parker in the morning. Brooks is not involved in this, but Stephens holds down Parkers legs as Dudley kills him with a pen knife. All three eat Parker and drink his blood (although its interesting to note that Stephens ate very little). A few days later while they're having "breakfast" they are rescued.
When they get back home, they are arrested and Brooks becomes a state witness. Dudley and Stephens are charged with murder and cannibalism. The two deny nothing that Brooks alleges but claim necessity as their defense. Both citing their families back home as reasons they needed to survive and carry on. Plus, Parker was going to die anyway, hell all of them would have died if they didn't eat or drink something, but Parker was sick off sea water.
Would you judge these two immorally wrong? Legally wrong? Are the extenuating circumstances great enough to excuse their behavior? Is murder murder, no matter what the circumstances?
I'd ask that you respond first before you find out the decision, or what others say if you don't already know. Or if you already know, do you agree with the outcome?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dudley_and_Stephens
-----signature-----
"Goddammit, Swearengen, I don't trust you as far as I could th'ow you, but I enjoy the way you lie."
I don't typo often, but when I do, I blame Swype.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Friarspam
Posts:
12,363
Registered:
Jan 23, '07
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 10,619
User ID: 1,200,702
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Man, talk about your cases that you'd hope to NEVER have to sit on.
-----signature-----
My folks went on vacation and all I got was this lousy sig.
|
|
Link to this post
|
MatrexMistwalker
Posts:
????
Registered:
????
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 0
User ID: 0
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
If he dies and they eat him no harm done... but they killed him that still counts as murder in my book.
Thats just my impression off what you posted dont know the case or the outcome.
-----signature-----
|
|
Link to this post
|
theredkay1
Posts:
6,731
Registered:
May 16, '08
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 6,729
User ID: 1,297,378
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Hmm...interesting...
Yes its murder and legally wrong. I dont think they deserve any serious punishment though.
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
Altra_Shadowstalker
Posts:
17,553
Registered:
Jan 17, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 16,076
User ID: 616,837
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
There's a TED lecture I listened to yesterday that brought this up. My personal feeling is that its wrong and immoral but I would do it anyway. And if I would do it, how could I condemn it as immoral.
The lecture also started off with another dilemma: your a train conductor and the breaks cut out as you near the station. There are five workers on the track that don't see you barreling down on them. Horrified, you notice a service track you can turn off to, but on that track there is one worker there. What do you do? I think most people would take out the one guy to save the five.
So Dudley is the captain, he has a responsibility to his crew. Should he sacrifice the one two save the other two? Would he fail in his duty if he didn't take action to save the most crewmen he could?
Another way of looking at it is through the lens of war. We acknowledge murder is wrong, but allow the moral exception to that in war. If I'm stranded in a life-or-death situation, I'm going into a warrior mindset. Everything I can do to survive will be done. If it is not immoral to kill in war, is it immoral to kill in a situation similar?
All of this is balanced against the fact that Parker's life was never mine to take. I don't have the moral authority to decide whether he should die so the rest of us should live.
In my next post I will describe the outcome so if you haven't made up your mind yet, stop here.
-----signature-----
"Goddammit, Swearengen, I don't trust you as far as I could th'ow you, but I enjoy the way you lie."
I don't typo often, but when I do, I blame Swype.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Altra_Shadowstalker
Posts:
17,553
Registered:
Jan 17, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 16,076
User ID: 616,837
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
The court ruled that Dudley and Stephens were guilty in this landmark case. There were some other legal factors that came into play here (part of their legal defense relied on religious law precedents and martine codes that the British court did not acknowledge).
This judgement on this case is now the basis for the Common Law standard that necessity does not justify murder.
The two had a death sentence with a recommendation for mercy and ultimately the sentence was six months. Culture and politics played a large role in the commuting of the sentence (if I read that right).
-----signature-----
"Goddammit, Swearengen, I don't trust you as far as I could th'ow you, but I enjoy the way you lie."
I don't typo often, but when I do, I blame Swype.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Z-Elder
Posts:
8,621
Registered:
Mar 15, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 8,465
User ID: 657,803
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
|
That sounds like a fair ending to the case. The murder issue is upheld yet they got an easy way out.
-----signature-----
"The poison of our ordinary habits has killed the magic of the moment"
"Men are not in hell because God is angry with them . . .
they stand in the state of division and separation which by their own motion, they have made for themselves"
|
|
Link to this post
|
steelsixsix
Posts:
????
Registered:
????
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 0
User ID: 0
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Fubar
They should get an extra 10 years for failing to lie about it properly
-----signature-----
|
|
Link to this post
|
paulg_68
Posts:
30,961
Registered:
Jul 27, '09
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 30,669
User ID: 1,364,918
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Altra_Shadowstalker posted:
My personal feeling is that its wrong and immoral but I would do it anyway.
It's like stealing a loaf of bread when you are starving. It is no less stealing and no less immoral just because you were starving. You have to make a choice, will you starve or will you commit an immoral act. When people try to rationalize away the immorality of an act based on need, you often find them start to apply a fast and loose definition of "need" in the future. This allows them to do whatever they want and still pretend like they are moral.
-----signature-----
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc "Everyone has a chance to become rich." - Groucho48 "Most of the human wealth on earth exists between the ears of live human beings." - theredkay1
|
|
Link to this post
|
Allstarslacker
Posts:
9,760
Registered:
May 23, '06
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 9,653
User ID: 1,140,793
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
I can accept that it is against the law, but I wouldn't say it was immoral. And I wouldn't vote to convict them either.
The will to survive is strong, and when you're desperate you do what you have to do.
In the end we're all still under the law of the jungle. Do whatever you can live with to survive.
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
Altra_Shadowstalker
Posts:
17,553
Registered:
Jan 17, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 16,076
User ID: 616,837
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Let me pose another hypothetical then, Allstar. This one was discussed in the TED talk too:
You're a doctor in the middle of the wilderness. Four deathly ill men stumble into your cabin, each needing an organ to survive. One a heart, another liver, one a kidney, one a lung. (or other vital organs if you want to ruin the hypothetical with "but you have two!")
A local also comes in for a small operation and is sedated in the back room. He happens to be a perfect match for all if the dying men. There is no other civilization around for hours or days, time these men simply do not have.
Do you sacrifice the one man in the back room to harvest his organs and save the four dying men? The dilemma has no way around it: either 4 men die, or 1 man dies.
If you answer no, what makes this scenario any different?
-----signature-----
"Goddammit, Swearengen, I don't trust you as far as I could th'ow you, but I enjoy the way you lie."
I don't typo often, but when I do, I blame Swype.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Allstarslacker
Posts:
9,760
Registered:
May 23, '06
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 9,653
User ID: 1,140,793
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
I would let the 4 men die.
The man that came in has done nothing to cause the situation of the men, and he has no obligation to save them.
I am fine regardless of what happens to those 4 men. That is the difference to me.
If I had been on that boat with those men I'm not sure what I would decide to do. That is why I withhold judgement from them.
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
steelsixsix
Posts:
????
Registered:
????
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 0
User ID: 0
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
|
I would eat the guy who tasted more like bacon
-----signature-----
|
|
Link to this post
|
Altra_Shadowstalker
Posts:
17,553
Registered:
Jan 17, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 16,076
User ID: 616,837
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
|
Fair enough Allstar, thank you for your response.
-----signature-----
"Goddammit, Swearengen, I don't trust you as far as I could th'ow you, but I enjoy the way you lie."
I don't typo often, but when I do, I blame Swype.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Walker_ID
Posts:
24,809
Registered:
May 29, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 23,164
User ID: 683,720
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
i find it interesting that they survived 15 days w/o water...so much that they were drinking urine and sea water
they were clearing dying of thirst yet somehow killing and eating one of them is some how going to save them? 
it's a ridiculous premise all around
p.s. salt water and urine are both equally deadly after a certain period
a temporary insanity plea would have been a more believable defense
-----signature-----
You can't outrun Darwin
|
|
Link to this post
|
Elkad
Title: aka Ebenezer
Posts:
8,058
Registered:
Sep 11, '03
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 7,478
User ID: 837,586
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
|
If the local is a match, then the other 4 are matches for one another. Kill one of them and save the other 3. Leave the local alone.
-----signature-----
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
Link to this post
|
Altra_Shadowstalker
Posts:
17,553
Registered:
Jan 17, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 16,076
User ID: 616,837
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Early on they killed a tortoise and were drinking its blood until it got contaminated with sea water. The captain also had two tins of turnips. All this was gone by the 5th day though. It's truly a remarkable survival story, even with the murder and cannibalism.
Actually, wiki is giving me a slightly different account than what the lecturer told me.
According to wikipedia, they were shipwrecked on July 5th. They salvaged two cans of turnips and no fresh water. The captain split the turnips on the 7th. On the 9th they spotted the tortoise which lasted them, along with the turnips, until the 15th or 17th. They started drinking their own urine on the 13th. On the 20th, Parker fell sick from drinking the sea water.
They started talking about drawing lots on the 16th or 17th.
On the 24th or 25th, with Parker in a comba, Dudley killed him.
On the 29th they saw a sail.
Dudley posted:
I can assure you I shall never forget the sight of my two unfortunate companions over that ghastly meal we all was like mad wolfs who should get the most and for men fathers of children to commit such a deed we could not have our right reason.
-----signature-----
"Goddammit, Swearengen, I don't trust you as far as I could th'ow you, but I enjoy the way you lie."
I don't typo often, but when I do, I blame Swype.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Kjarhall
Title: The Pungent One
Posts:
29,212
Registered:
Mar 1, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 23,233
User ID: 652,381
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
|
I would consider nothing they did out there as being under anyones jurisdiction. What happened in Vegas, stays in Vegas.
-----signature-----
You're a crazy moron*
*http://vnboards.ign.com/outpost/b22180/115147923/r115151508/
hah! true story tho i'm a woman an i even love boobs..how can you not??- HallowEve
|
|
Link to this post
|
Kjarhall
Title: The Pungent One
Posts:
29,212
Registered:
Mar 1, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 23,233
User ID: 652,381
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Walker_ID posted:
they were clearing dying of thirst yet somehow killing and eating one of them is some how going to save them?
Food has moisture (water) in it. HTH.
-----signature-----
You're a crazy moron*
*http://vnboards.ign.com/outpost/b22180/115147923/r115151508/
hah! true story tho i'm a woman an i even love boobs..how can you not??- HallowEve
|
|
Link to this post
|
Moe_Nox
Title: In Moe We Trust
Posts:
22,319
Registered:
Feb 4, '07
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 19,181
User ID: 1,203,840
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Only reading the initial post, not guilty of murder. Manslaughter at the very worst, but I would even vote against that.
You cannot criminalize actions that are the only recourse for a person to save their own life.
Situation dictates, always, and this is a crappy situation. Its far better that one die and three live than all 4 to perish of hunger.
Not guilty of murder, put me on the jury.
-----signature-----
The Nanny State cometh Currency should be bacon cheeseburgers and blow jobs... - Reese Life at the Outpost: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1771556
|
|
Link to this post
|
GrilledCheez
Title: The Lord's Balls
Posts:
37,872
Registered:
Mar 22, '06
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 26,537
User ID: 1,125,840
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
Why is walker so stupid?
One of the first things I remember about school is that the human body is over 3/4 water.
Anywho, I'd say it was murder. Necessity isn't and shouldn't be a defense to murder.
I would feel the same way if they all drew straws. If I'm on the jury they all go away for murder.
PS. Cannibalism I have no problem with, but if it was the law at the time I'd convict them of it and give them no sentence.
-----signature-----
Another word for expensive is successful.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Walker_ID
Posts:
24,809
Registered:
May 29, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 23,164
User ID: 683,720
|
Subject:
Outpost Jurors: R v Dudley and Stephens, you decide
|
GrilledCheez posted:
Why is walker so stupid?
One of the first things I remember about school is that the human body is over 3/4 water.
something i learned about in school is the water content is drastically reduced during dehydration and the body contains significant amounts of NaCl(salt)
school is fun
-----signature-----
You can't outrun Darwin
|
|
Link to this post
|
