In the United States Supreme Court case Ex Parte Crow Dog, 109 U.S. 557 (1883), a Lower Brule Sioux man murdered another Indian man named Spotted Tail. Under the law of his Tribe, Crow Dog was required to hunt for (and otherwise financially support) the victim’s dependent relatives as a punishment for the murder. The facts of the case recounted in careful detail, clearly illustrate that the Lower Brule Sioux recognized a more comprehensive class of people as “victims” than under Anglo law. All persons dependent upon the murdered man for their sustenance were considered victims. One could make an argument based upon custom and tradition, that compensation and restitution for an injured Lower Brule Sioux victim in Tribal court should cover all lost wages and lost labor used to support dependents.
4015 E. Paradise Falls Dr. Suite 131, Tucson, Arizona 85712
Phone: (520) 623-8192
Fax: (520) 623-8246
Copyright © 2019 - niccsa.org
Site Design - CS Design Studios
*NICCSA is a project of the Southwest Center for Law and Policy (www.swclap.org) This project is supported by Grant No. 2017-SA-AX-K001, awarded by the Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.