Because it's not murder. Words have meanings and while it's tragic, the described crime is not murder. It's manslaughter. Manslaughter is a lesser crime than murder because of intent. The level of manslaughter (varies by jurisdiction) is going to depend on the circumstances. Within that, the sentencing recommendation is going to vary based on circumstances. Those circumstances may involve what led to the event as well as what the prosecutor believes they can prove in court.
Sentencing is complicated and the replies about rich people not getting charged are just ignorant speculation.
You say it's not murder but theres tons of cases of road rage where someone intentionally hits and kills cyclists and get off incredibly lightly. It's not just car accidents where it's treated far more lightly.
It's entirely relevant. The question was why the guy only got two years for "murder".
The reality is sentencing is complicated. I answered the question. I'm not sure how answering a simple question of "Why?" with the correct answer needs to be controversial.
5
u/HittingSmoke Aug 12 '21
Because it's not murder. Words have meanings and while it's tragic, the described crime is not murder. It's manslaughter. Manslaughter is a lesser crime than murder because of intent. The level of manslaughter (varies by jurisdiction) is going to depend on the circumstances. Within that, the sentencing recommendation is going to vary based on circumstances. Those circumstances may involve what led to the event as well as what the prosecutor believes they can prove in court.
Sentencing is complicated and the replies about rich people not getting charged are just ignorant speculation.