Freakonomics has a post about a curious legal quirk:
Remarkably, in 14 states, the prosecution of family members for harboring fugitives is not an option, regardless of the nature of the crime or the extent of the family member’s involvement.
They go into the surface reasons why this policy developed (presence of domestic abuse and thus a sense of coerced cooperation perhaps) and some of the obvious reasons why this might be considered bad policy.
Of course, the real answer to why one would side with a criminal family member, even when they know they are doing wrong, is evolution. Being locked in prison is bad for one’s chances of passing on one’s genetic material. Aside from having a child yourself, the best way to pass on genetic material is by assisting blood relatives in having children. Thus one would do quite a bit to promote a favorable outcome. Evolution doesn’t directly explain the behavior, but it does explain the tight family bonds that would explain the behavior.
Should the law take this into account? Probably not much, but that doesn’t mean it is difficult to understand.
