Law in Contemporary Society

-- NicoGurian - 10 Apr 2015

So it turns out that the state of Idaho's criminal code (18-5003) includes a prohibition against cannibalism, which you are guilty of if you "willfully ingest the flesh or blood of a human being." Interestingly enough, the statute contains an affirmative defense (call it the Dudley defense) for such an act if taken "under extreme life-threatening conditions as the only apparent means of survival." Additionally, the maximum penalty if convicted of cannibalism is 14 years in prison, so slightly different than what Dudley faced.

Another thing that might be of interest (that combines cannibalism with some other things we've discussed in class): In 2013, an NYPD officer was convicted of a plot to kidnap, kill, and eat a large number of women. The evidence prosecutor's used in the case were postings in an online chatroom and internet searches. Given our discussion today about needing to convict Dudley to distinguish what "we" do from what "they" do, it begs the question of how the cannibalism part of the story impacted how the jury thought about the case.


Webs Webs

r1 - 10 Apr 2015 - 21:33:23 - NicoGurian
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM