Year. R v Dudley and Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273. The loser was killed and eaten. The defendants, Mr. Brooks and the victim Mr. Parker were English seamen. And it is a criminal case that shook the English society of its day, and still plays with people’s minds today because it deals with the harshest aspects of life and death: survival.. This is a very important criminal law case about cannibalism on the high seas. The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens Case Brief - Rule of Law: A person may not sacrifice another person's life to save his own. How intriguing is the case of The Queen v Dudley and Stephens; after being lured into questioning my beliefs, below is my attempt at reconciliation. They intended to kill him for food. R v Dudley and Stephens [1884] 14 QBD 273 DC is a leading English criminal case that established a precedent, throughout the common law world, that necessity is no defense against a charge of murder. [ 1 ] It concerned survival cannibalism following a shipwreck and its purported justification on the basis of a custom of the sea. INTRODUCTION The widely famous case of R v Dudley and Stephens which deals with the taboo act of cannibalism asks the debatable question of having necessity as a defence. Country. Area of law. The case of Regina v. Dudley and Stephens decided in 1884 is one of the most talked cases in the history regarding the relation between law and morality. The decision in Regina v Dudley and Stephens provoked much criticism, which can be divided into two groups: criticism of the legal opinion of the verdict and criticism of the decision being a political tool of Home Office policy. English criminal law concerns offences, their prevention and the consequences, in England and Wales.Criminal conduct is considered to be a wrong against the whole of a community, rather than just the private individuals affected. The real title of the case is: Her Majesty The Queen vs. Tom Dudley and Edwin Stephens. In this article, Stuti Mishra does a case analysis of R v Dudley and Stephens. The two defendants and a boy between the ages of seventeen and eighteen were cast away in an open boat at sea following a storm. In R v Dudley v Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273 it was said that ‘necessity’ could not be a defence to murder. The question is somewhat wrongly stated. Fuller’s allegorical Case of the Speluncean Explorers, set in the Supreme Court of Newgarth inthe year 4300, is a fictionalized variation on the very real case of R v Dudley and Stephens, 3. a staple of introductory criminal law cases throughout the common law world, and a case made even more famous in Brian Simpson’s That is homicide.