As Rekha Basu points out, they have their own calling cards.
A rich teenager walked away with probation after killing four people and seriously injuring two others while driving drunk. The judge accepted the contention of a defense psychologist that the teen was the victim of “affluenza,” raised with such wealth and entitlement that he never learned from his mistakes and was not responsible for his actions.
Imagine a public defender for a poor kid trying to get his client off on the grounds that his parent, working multiple jobs, wasn’t around enough to show him right from wrong. The kid would probably have been petitioned to adult court and sent to the slammer for a long time.
Read the rest.