On necessity as a defense to homicide in Regina v. Dudley and Stephens
$9.95
10 word format
document in english
literature
presentation
published 20/07/2008
review : not yet assessed
level : General public
requested 0 times
SummaryThe present paper asks and addresses the questions: what principles, if any, distinguish Regina v. Dudley and Stephens (RDS) from scenarios in which necessity ought to be a defense to homicide? Were Dudley and Stephens guilty of murder? After laying out the relevant facts of RDS I will answer the question by considering variations on what I call “floodgate necessity” scenarios (FNs). In RDS, Dudley, Stephens, Brooks, and Parker, are stranded on a boat. On their twentieth day at sea, having been without food for eight days and having had very little water, Dudley kills Parker.
Table of Contents
- Floodgate necessity scenarios.
- Destruction of property to avert peril to a community or destruction of a community to avert peril to a larger community.
- Translating ex post RDS into an FN.
- Contrasting the ex post and ex ante floodgate renditions of RDS with BFN.
- Implications.
- Difference in principle between RDS and BFN.
- An argument in defense of Dudley and Stephens.
Most downloaded documents over 30 days in literature Latest in the category literature From the same author
knowledge network