Speluncean Explorers

http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2005/08/revisiting_the_.html

This is a post regarding the speluncean exploreres. This has subject to much debates due to morality, society, humanity and the law. This blog is about whose opinions reader would join or present a different position entirely.
I came across this case during my first lecture of jurisprudence during my LLB final year.
This is a hard case, they are guilty in law, but in another point of view, they are just doing this to save each other by sacrifying one of their member.

In this case, I would join Judge Tatting. Clearly, we all live in a lawful society, law is abiding everyone of us. And killing is unlawful, so the statues need to apply in this case. But, the explorers are not willing to kill anyone if they are able to survive for 10 days. No one on the ground outside answer if it would be legally and or morally permissible to kill one among them to sustain the others. In my view, they are responsible for the killing as well, because they couldnt answer their question this makes them making decision on their own.

They kill because they want to survive, they kill because there is no other better option available. If they dont kill any of their member, they couldnt have survive until the rescuer reach them. So, if they are guilty for the murder after all, there is no different for them to die of starvation because at the end of the day, they still couldnt survive. They couldnt escape from the law.

On one hand, we are all bound by the law, on the other hand, we are human living in the society, bound with morality. It is harsh to make any decision. So, I would join Justice Tatting.