Davis: The only relevant factor in determining appropriate compensation for property damage or theft is the value th...

Skylar on April 26, 2020

@jingjingxiao11111@gmail,com, happy to help!

Davis states that compensation for property damage/theft should be calculated based on the value of the property only. Higuchi states that compensation should consider the property value as well as the harm the crime causes the victim. For example, he cites that a victim whose property is missing for two years is owed more than a victim whose property is missing for one year.

We are asked to identify the answer choice that Davis and Higuchi would disagree with each other on.

(E) "The compensation owed to victims should be determined on a case-by-case basis rather than by some general rule."

This is incorrect because both Davis and Higuchi would agree. Davis feels that compensation should depend on how much the property in question is worth, which varies from case to case. Higuchi feels that compensation should depend on how much the property is worth and the level of harm to the victim, both of which vary from case to case.

(D) "Some victims are owed increased compensation because of the greater amount of time they are deprived of the use of their property."

This is correct because Davis would disagree with the statement and Higuchi would agree with it. Davis believes property value alone should determine compensation, not time or harm to the victim. Higuchi disagrees, as evidenced by the example he gives about a victim whose property was missing for two years being owed more than a victim whose property was missing for only one year.

Does that make sense? Please let us know if you have any additional questions!