When There Should Be No Deals

Marginal Revolution has a recurring post called “markets in everything.” These posts show humorous examples of odd markets that most people would never have guessed existed. Sadly, though, there are markets in things that should never exist: deals by criminals with the victims or the victims’ families. This doesn’t happen in the United States but it is all too common in the Indian subcontinent.

In Pakistan, it is traditional for a person who rapes and murders a young girl to offer “blood money” to the victim’s father to avoid punishment. The logic is that the victim is like the father’s property ― like his car. “Oh, I’m sorry I damaged your car. Here’s some money and let’s keep the police out of this.” That this is “traditional” and therefore not uncommon shows that this tradition creates all of the wrong incentives to prevent the crime in the first place.

Amit Varma of India Uncut has a similar story from a court in New Dehli, India. A convicted rapist named Bhura, (apparently his family was too poor to afford a second name), offered to marry the victim to avoid jail time. If you read the account, he did not just rape the victim, he blinded her by gouging her eyes out when she tried to resist. Bhura gives his reasons for wanting to marry the victim:

In his application, Bhura pleaded the court to take a lenient view as he is now a reformed man and said since no one would be ready to marry the young victim due to the stigma, he would like to tie the knot with her. [Emphasis added by me.]

He could have added that he has a strong desire to help her become a mother. Such a humanitarian! The disgusting part of this deal is that he might succeed because the victim is “damaged goods.” But how does this deal protect the public at large?

The judge in question delayed sentencing to ask the victim whether she would agree to Bhura’s proposal. Why victimize her again?

Maybe she could deal too. “Can I have your eyes?” Is that too much to ask? Sometimes there can be no deals.

I wrote to Amit Varma:

I am all for free markets but sometimes you need to say: "All deals off." Society needs protection from this violent criminal.

The judge should have just sentenced him without bothering the poor victim again.

Amit wrote back:

That's what bothers me. Not the stupid offer, because some regressive idiots will always be there, but the fact that the judge assumed that the victim might want to accept that offer, and that he ― a judge, not some uneducated lumpen fool ― implicitly thought it reasonable. [Emphasis added by me. By the way, “regressive idiots” does not refer to economists.]

That’s the point. If the judge thinks such a request is reasonable, is he any better than the criminals he is supposed to sentence? It’s the judge’s duty to say “No deals.”

Update

The criminal got life.

Amit writes:

The Indian Express (IE) spoke to the victim, and her reaction is:

This is so bad that I cannot begin to describe it. I have waited so long for him to be sentenced. Instead, they want me to say whether I am willing to marry him. I will definitely appear in court with my parents, and I will tell the judge to hang him, so that what has happened to me might not happen to anyone else.

Amit writes in the comments below that it is unfair for me to characterize this event as anything other than extraordinary. The press only writes about buildings that burn, as the saying goes. A westerner could get the wrong impression about India. Fair enough. An Indian might read the Washington Post and conclude that high school students shooting up their classmates is common in the U.S., when we know it is rare.

On the other hand, it is fair to say that the U.S. has a problem with high school students shooting their classmates and India has at least one judge with astoundingly poor judgement. Economists have a saying: "The plural of anecdote is data."