. 1 . 15.

1. If you were a judge, would you find these men guilty? Why?
If I was a judge, I would find only one of them guilty. I mean the one who committed the murder. The other one just agreed for it and did nothing helping the murderer. But if he had helped him he could be sentenced for complicity in the crime. Also I think the necessity in this case couldn't justify the murderer because this boy was in the same conditionals and he did nothing illegal to the murderer. If we appeal to modern criminal law of Russia we won't find there an exemption from responsibility for a murder.

2. Does this case raise moral or legal problems (or both)? Why?
I personally think that there are not any moral problems in this case (first of I use this term in the legal interpretation). I think so because I am sure that that the law is the highest expression of the morality and that's why these two things can't contradict to each other. Moral problems could arise () three men having had a possibility to kill the boy: they chose between the murder (I mean the deprivation the innocent man of his life) and their own lives. Legal problem is to decide whether this situation is attenuating circumstance or not. All other moments, I suppose, are clear: that was a murder that must be punished.