If you purport to have killed a person to save five then you will be tried and convicted of murder as there is absolutely no way that you can proved that five people would have died if the one person was not killed in the trolley or train scenarios to which the 'Moral Dilemma' test usually refers. People knowing this, and knowing how tangled and complicated getting involved in an unfolding situation will make a decision based on that and not the 'one verses five' moral Dilemma actually being tested making these tests all but irrelevant and entirely misleading....how could you, an ordinary citizen and not an expert, possibly have had knowledge of the impending deaths?? You couldn't.

The only condition in which a one-five might be instructive is if a person shot someone at random and there was a reasonable probability that he intended to kill five more that are within range, would you then shoot him if you had the chance?