Case of Speluncean Explorers Essay

After course session the opinions of various judges in the upshot of The Speluncean Explorers, I found the argu handsts of legal expert harbor well justified. Hence, I agree with him the most. He believes that the four explorers be innocent of any(prenominal) crime and rests his conclusion on deuce grounds.Firstly, Justice sustain takes the view that affirmatory legality provokenot be applied to the case. Instead, he extracts that virtue of nature should govern the case. manpowers co existence in a indian lodge is essential for the use of positivistic law. I agree with him because in this situation where the co existence of the men is not possible without the taking of life, positive law is not applicable. He believes apothegm cessante rati atomic number 53 legis, cessat et ipsa lex which mean when the reason for law ceases, the law itself ceases, should be applied to thiscase.I agree with him that the men were not guilty of crime because Roger Whetmores life was ended in a state of nature and not in a state of civil society. This is a case where natural law supersedes positive law. He also brocaded a point regarding the jurisdiction that the state had over these explorers at the time of the massacre given that they were miles below the territorial jurisdiction.Also, what the men did was according to the agreement accepted by all of them.I agree with Justice cherishs question that when the state can sacrifice the lives of ten workers trying to bring through the five explorers in the cave , therefore why isnt it justified that angiotensin converting enzyme life be sacrificed to save the lives of four.Secondly, he emphasizes and talks about the relevance of the meretricious manage. The case had been decided without violating the jurisprudence he who shall willfully take the life of another(prenominal) is a performanceer. However, literal rule cannot always be applied. Justice Foster illustrates cases such as Commonwealth v.Staymore an d Fehler v. Neegas to sanction his argument that applying golden rule practically gives a more just result. He raises a point that the above-mentioned statute has never been applied literally by giving an example of the exception of self-defense. I agree with him that statutes must be pronounce between the lines to close the loopholes and give a fair judgment.Also, there was no venomous intention in committing the murder and it was just for the purpose of survival. An important point to be noticed is thelack of intention to murder and the role of survival.According to Aristotle and Platos hold forth on law, I also bet that the end can justify the means and so to save many people, one man was killed. Therefore, I agree with Justice Foster that the four men are innocent of the crime of murdering Roger Whetmore.