Philosophy of Law: Case of the Spelunzian Explorers

Introduction

• Speaker: Akash Singrator, Lewis University of Rome.
• Module Written by: Garima Goswami, independent research scholar, New Delhi.
• Topic: Understand the case of the Spelunzian Explorers and its implications for various legal theories.
• Origin: Fictional case by Lon Fuller, published in Harvard Law Review, 1949.
• Context: Hypothetical case generating significant theoretical interest, involving murder and cannibalism.

Background of the Case

• Scenario: A group of Speluncian explorers trapped in a cave.
• Members: Four accused and Roger Wetmore.
• Circumstances: No food, rescue underway, advised survival unlikely past 10 days without food.
• Decision: Suggestion to kill and eat a member for survival, decided by dice, Wetmore loses, is killed and eaten.
• Result: Rescued on the 32nd day, Wetmore was killed on the 23rd day.

Legal Context

• Law: "Whosoever shall willfully take the life of another shall be punished by death."
• Purpose: Introduce diverse legal theories (e.g., natural law, positivism, etc.) and their practical consequences.

Initial Trial and Outcome

• Charge: Four men accused of murder, sentenced to death.
• Appeal: Supreme Court to decide on upholding or overturning the death sentence.
• Judges' Opinions:
  • 2 judges uphold conviction.
  • 2 judges overturn conviction.
  • 1 judge recuses.

Judges' Opinions

1. Chief Justice Truepenny:
   • Positivist, upholds conviction, suggests clemency by executive.
2. Justice Foster:
   • Natural law theorist, seeks acquittal, argues self-preservation akin to self-defense.
3. Justice Tating:
   • Recuses, critiques natural law, refers to precedent (Commonwealth v. Valjean) against theft justification.
4. Justice Keene:
   • Favors death penalty, criticizes clemency suggestion, sees no self-defense by accused.
5. Justice Hardy:
   • Appeals to public opinion, suggests acquittal due to widespread public support.

Subsequent Proceedings and Opinions

• Post-Supreme Court Commission:
  • Professor One: Against clemency, sees murder as self-interest.
  • Professor Two: Favors clemency, statute interpretation not violated.
  • Professor Three: Suggests reduced sentence to service.

Contemporary Proceedings and Theories

• Feminist and Critical Race Theorists: Suggest retrial with jury, criticize death penalty.
• Justice Green: Affirms conviction, critical of class disparities in justice.
• Additional Theories: Present various legal interpretations, including preventive killing, radical nonviolence, and feminist empathy.

50th Anniversary Review

• Cass Sunstein: Textualist, supports conviction based on statute clarity.
• Alan Dershowitz: Minimalist, argues for acquittal due to lack of explicit legal prohibition.

Conclusion

• Educational Value: Introduces students to a wide range of legal theories and their practical outcomes.
• Significance: Illustrates how theoretical commitments lead to diverse judicial outcomes and real-world implications.