Q&A: Compensation in a Criminal Offense
Compensation in a Criminal Offense
Question
Hello,
I wanted to ask about: 1. the money paid by a man who rapes a virgin נערה (when they do not marry) 2. the additional one-fifth paid by one who robs to the person robbed.
Can one say that there is a similar underlying principle in both, in the sense that they are a kind of compensation that does not require proof of damage, or that in both there is an element of punitive compensation…, or is there another way to describe what they have in common?
Or is there no point at all in looking for a similarity between them?
And apologies in advance for my ignorance..
Answer
Two corrections: a rapist pays a fine in any case, even if he marries her. A seducer does not. The additional fifth does not exist for an ordinary robber, only for one who falsely denies under oath.
I didn’t understand the question. Fines are punitive payments.
Discussion on Answer
In Jewish law there are two types of payments (there are more, like atonement payment, but this is what matters for our purposes): monetary payment and a fine. Monetary payment is compensation for damage, repayment of a loan, and the like. Naturally, in monetary payments the amount collected is the principal (what I damaged or what I borrowed). Any payment that is not monetary payment, and the indication is that it is fixed (not dependent on the basis for the payment, aside from half-damages in the case of goring damage) and its amount differs from the principal, is a fine (except for half-damages for pebbles propelled by an animal’s movement). For example, goring damage obligates payment of half-damages, and that is a fine. Theft obligates double-payment, and that is a fine. A rapist and a seducer also pay a fine (and also compensation).
Every fine payment is a punitive payment. The punishment can sometimes be for a side issue. For example, for falsely denying a monetary claim under oath one pays an additional fifth, and that is apparently a punishment for the oath (because for falsely denying a monetary claim without an oath one does not pay this).
As for fines that are bound up with damages, I’m not sure I understood the question. There are several fines paid for harming another person: half-damages for goring damage, double-payment for theft, fifty silver shekels for rape, and the like.
Regarding conspiring witnesses, there is indeed a tannaitic dispute whether this is a fine or monetary payment. The commentators discussed this because there it is a case where no damage was actually caused; they only wanted it to be caused. So seemingly it should be a fine. I think the Torah views it as though they actually caused the damage, and therefore some define it as monetary payment. But that is an exceptional case.
Thank you very much
In the two cases I mentioned (and also double-payment), is it indeed a fine?
Is there anything else in Torah law that is a fine arising from what today could be defined as a criminal offense rather than a tortious act, and that is paid to the victim of the offense?
I saw regarding conspiring witnesses that there is a dispute whether the payment imposed on them is classified as monetary liability or as a fine. (Wikipedia). And I saw that there are fines that are completely bound up with the laws of damages.
I assume I’ve made a bit of a mess here. If you could clarify a little..