A defendant¹ is much more likely to be sentenced to death if he or she kills a "high-status" victim, according to new research by Scott Phillips, associate professor of sociology（社会学） and criminology（犯罪学，刑事学） at the University of Denver (DU). According to his research published in Law and Society Review, (43-4:807-837), the probability of being sentenced to death is much greater if a defendant kills a white or Hispanic（西班牙的） victim who is married with a clean criminal record and a college degree, as opposed to a black or Asian victim who is single with a prior criminal record and no college degree.

Recent discussions of the death penalty tend to focus on innocence² and cost. Phillips' research says that arbitrariness（任意，专横） has long been a concern.

"The concept of arbitrariness suggests that the relevant legal facts of a capital case cannot fully³ explain the outcome: irrelevant⁴ social facts also shape the ultimate state sanction（制裁，处罚） " Phillips says. "In the capital of capital punishment, death is more apt to（易于） be sought and imposed on behalf of high status victims. Some victims matter more than others."

Phillips research is based on 504 death penalty cases that occurred in Harris County, Texas between 1992 and 1999.

Drawing on the same data, Phillips's previous research demonstrated that black defendants⁵ were more likely to be sentenced to death than white defendants in Houston. The racial disparities（不等，不一致） revealed in the prior paper become even more acute after accounting⁶ for victim social status – black defendants were more apt to be sentenced to death despite being less apt to kill high status victims.

The combined results of the two papers call into question the meaning of justice.

"Should justice be defined according to the punishment a particular defendant deserves?" Phillips asks, "Or should justice be defined according to whether the judicial⁷ system can hand out lethal⁸（致命的） punishment in an even-handed manner? The question strikes at the heart of the death penalty debate."