Originally published at: Idaho man charged with cannibalism | Boing Boing
…
The microwave!?! Freakin’ amateur.
I’m so very glad your comment is first.
The beauty of the Donner Party defense (from the defendant’s point of view) is that you have to convince a jury not that you were going to die if you didn’t commit cannibalism, but merely that you might reasonably have feared that you would. It’s much like the case of a killer police officer who was never in danger but swears credibly on the witness stand that he feared he was.
So it’s the gastronomical equivalent to the stand your ground laws?
“There can be only one” ?
I know, right?
If someone kills me with the intention to eat me, and then they microwave me instead of crafting me in to an exquisite 5 course meal, I will haunt them!
So a cannibalism law seems like one of those things that would mostly apply to people who aren’t competent to stand trial for it (or have a valid defense, i.e. the “Donner party” scenario). Which I suppose explains why most states don’t have such a thing.
Speaking of cannibals - a personal favorite of cheesy B movies. It was made by South Park creators pre South Park, Trey Parker and Matt Stone. It is a humorous account of the only person convicted of cannibalism in the US, Alfred Packard.
Some of the song are pretty catchy. This vintage trailer doesn’t really sell it.
My heart is full liked a baked potato!
I’m just amazed that there is a specific exemption for the Donnor Party situation. Someone in the Idaho legislature thought that through and wrote it into legislation and passed it!
IANAL but isn’t there an overall defense of necessity? Imagine I’m walking down the street and I see someone get seriously injured and I need a first aid kit. The store next to me is closed but I can see in the window they have first aid kits. I break the window open and grab the kit and save the injured guy’s life. I’m guilty of breaking and entering but I can make a defense of necessity in that case I think?
Huh, I’d have thought that if there was a state that felt the need to specifically outlaw cannibalisms it would have been Wisconsin.
Also it’s just redundant. There are laws against murder and laws against desecrating corpses, so in the extremely rare circumstance you catch a person eating another person there’s probably going to be some serious charges available to prosecutors already.
Would fava beans and a nice Chianti be considered paraphernalia? Grounds for a search? Asking for a friend.
Yeah, it’s a real “outrage” law - highly redundant and extremely unlikely to ever actually be used, but some legislators wasted everyone’s time creating a law to cover it because they were so outraged by the idea of cannibalism.
Neither of those laws cover cannibalism when the victim is still alive. The Idaho law does.