[HaveHadEnough]

Unless, of course, "poor" people (by whatever definition of "poor" is being used at the moment) are much more likely to commit first degree murder.

Maybe not. Assume that out of 100 execution eligible murders, 80 are committed by poor people. If 70 of those poor murderers are sentenced to death, but only 1 of the non-poor murderers are so sentenced, I think there is a problem.

[wideawake]

Assume that out of 100 execution eligible murders, 80 are committed by poor people. If 70 of those poor murderers are sentenced to death, but only 1 of the non-poor murderers are so sentenced, I think there is a problem.

A hypothetical statistical analysis that doesn'tr capture reality.

The definition of "poor" can be engineered to produce whatever result you like.

A drugdealer who makes $500,000 a year in unreported tax-free income magically becomes "poor" when he is up on first-degree murder charges. Why? Because from a legally-reported income perspective he is an unemployed school dropout whose last legal address was in an impoverished neighborhood.

A truck driver who makes $35,000 a year in pre-tax income becomes "middle class" when he is up on first-degree murder charges.

Why? Because he is gainfully employed, pays taxes and lives in a respectable neighborhood.

The designation is almost completely arbitrary unless we are talking about the microscopic percentage of accused first-degree murderers who actually are independently wealthy.

In that case we are talking about 1 out of 100,000 and not 20 out of 100.