Three models may be used to explain the differential punishment of homicide offenders. The arbitrary justice model hypothesizes that judicial sentencing is arbitrary, such that case outcomes are unpredictable. The discriminatory justice model holds that differential punishment is based in the classification of offenders and offenses according to characteristics relevant to culpability. The economic justice model explains differential punishment as a function of the social costs and benefits associated with each homicide. The economic justice model explains much of the data observed in studies of homicide characteristics and dispositions in Philadelphia and Houston. Under the economic justice model, final case disposition is hypothesized to be a function of the personal attributes of the killer and victim and of the social distance between them. If the killer and victim are strangers, if the principals are of different races, or if the killing involves an ancillary offense (e.g., rape or armed robbery), severe punishment is more likely than under circumstances where the killer and victim were involved in intense social conflict. Public policy tends to reserve the most severe sanction for those acts which most visibly threaten public order. 46 references.