
Rape victim rejects judge’s offer: $150K for her, reduced sentence for attacker - pseudolus
https://www.washingtonpost.com/crime-law/2019/11/09/rape-victim-rejects-judges-offer-her-reduced-sentence-attacker/
======
deogeo
He empowered her to choose her own justice, her own restitution.

On a related note, I'm reminded of an article that examined the effect choice
has on us, and that often, we're happier without it. One of the examples was
even, I believe, a study about major medical decisions, that showed patients
were happier when doctors decided for them. But I forgot the exact scope of
the medical decisions, and can't find the article or study - if anyone else
can, I'd be very grateful.

In any case, this article serves as a fine example - the victim is unhappy
about being given choice over the punishment.

~~~
bllllrrrp
I think it's easy to see how the "choice" in this situation comes off as a
request to "buy forgiveness" on behalf of the perpetrator. The harm that was
done is not primarily financial, financial restitution would never "make it
right" at an emotional level, and undermines the desire to quarantine
individuals that have proven themselves to be a danger to others. The choice
would be insulting to many people, and directly opposed to common ideals about
justice.

In light of that, calling it "empowerment" comes off as a little tone-deaf,
and I doubt the response would be any different if the judge had unilaterally
chosen X years + Y dollars, but it later came to light that X+N years and 0
dollars had been an equally valid option.

------
paggle
Why offer a trade? Why not just add the restitution to the full jail sentence?

~~~
deogeo
An excessive punishment is just as unfair as one that is too lenient.

~~~
algorithm_dk
A lifetime in prison is the right punishment for rape.

~~~
deogeo
I disagree (depending on the case, I guess), but that's a matter of opinion.
My answer was merely to explain the judge's actions, and was not intended as a
comment on whether this particular sentence is just. If the judge believes the
initial jail term was a fair punishment, then if he were to add a fine, he'd
have to reduce the jail term, for the punishment to remain fair _in his eyes_.

------
crb002
Fundamental error. Imagine if it was a theft case and the victim was WalMart.
Bad bad constitutional violation to delegate judicial power to individuals
which include both real people and corporeals.

~~~
crb002
It would have been constitutional to offer both choices to the defendant,
assuming it didn’t violate Timbs v Indiana with the fine exceeding the
jurisdictional maximum for the offense.

