Regina (The Queen) vs Dudley and Stephens

My decision: Other punishment I think they should be sentenced to 10000 hours community service

Considerations: 

-Dudley and Stephens were in a state of desparation 

-They had no way of knowing if or when they would get help 

-Had they not eaten for the 4 days before the rescue they would have starved to death because of their already food-deprived bodies 

-Parker was in a worse condition "extremely weakened by famine and by drinking sea water, and unable to make any resistance" and wouldn't have lived much longer on the boat 

I think that these facts of the case point to the necessity of cannibalizing Parker, so really the question now comes down to: Should you be allowed to murder if that is the best possible solution? (in this case the problem would be 4 people starving to death, and the solution is to sacrifice 1 to save the other 3) 

I think that in the trial of Dudley and Stephens, yes because of simple math. 3 is more than 0. The preservation of 3 human lives to me is more valuable than 0 despite how 1 has to be deliberately sacrificed by the other 3.  

But after I did more research I found another factor to weigh in. The dangerous precedent that it creates to let the defendants off scot-free. (That is that people can prove innocent when tried for murder by arguing that it was necessary to preserve their life). Therefore, I think that it is important to avoid setting such a precedent to at least punish them

Theory reflected: Natural law 

Looks at motive, circumstances, consequences