I need your oppinion please!

Hi
I would like to take your opinion in this issue

On July 5, 1884, Dudley, Stephens and Brooks -- "all able-bodied English seamen" -- and an English teenage boy were cast adrift in a lifeboat following a storm at sea. They had no water with them in the boat, and all they had for sustenance were two one-pound tins of turnips. On July 24, Dudley proposed that one of the four in the lifeboat be sacrificed to save the others. Stephens agreed with Dudley, but Brooks refused to consent -- and the boy was never asked for his opinion. On July 25, Dudley killed the boy, and the three men then fed on the boy's body and blood. Four days later, the men were rescued by a passing vessel. They were taken to England and tried for the murder of the boy. If the men had not fed on the boy's body, they would probably have died of starvation within the four-day period. The boy, who was in a much weaker condition, would likely have died before the rest [(Regina v. Dudley and Stephens, 14 Q.B.D. (Queen's Bench Division, England) 273 (1884).]

Should the survivors be subject to penalties under English common law, given the men's unusual circumstances? You be the judge and decide the issue. Give the reasons for your decision.
and should judges ever have the power to look beyond the written"letter of the law" in making their decisions?why and why not?

[able1]

Most posters here dont answer academic questions due to time constraints and since it is your personal assignment.

But check the web generally as well. Good luck!