Talk about a moral debate.. if the victim was willing, is it really murder?
Yep, I'd say so, because the victim clearly wasn't competent to give consent, and certainly no sane individual would consent to eating their own penis, fried. It's like the difference between euthanasia of a patient who is mentally competent, versus one who is depressed and suicidal.
(NB: I'd consider this seperate, also, to the withdrawal of treatment for brain dead or critically brain damaged 'vegetable' patients, as their condition is terminal; had the victim been, for example, terminally ill it'd be a lot murkier, although I think the following overrides....).
The other side issue, of course, is that regardless of the victims consent, this was done for pleasure. It's like - although this is rather a poor analogy I admit - if a women walks about wearing a t-shirt saying 'Rape Me', does it mean someone who does rape (bearing in mind rape has to be completely non-consensual, i.e. she couldn't agree in any way to it even if she had some bizarre desire to be raped) her can get away with it?
