Main Page | See live article | Alphabetical index


Necessity (as a term of jurisprudence) is a possible justification for breaking the law. Defendants who use this defense are arguing that they should not be held liable for a crime, since the actionss taken were, for some reason or other, "necessary". In an early trial, for which this defense was used, Crown v. Dudly & Stephens (late-1800s), two shipwrecked sailors decided to eat a cabin boy. The court ruled that cannibalizing the indidivual was not necessary; the sailors were found guilty of murder. Other courts have ruled, in cases where the eaten individual had died of "natural causes" and starvation was an issue, that cannibalism was acceptable.