He must have had a good defence lawyer, who could prove that maybe he was within the speed limit and it was a lone case of careless crossing (jay-walking) and thereby, not completely his fault.
But yes if he's at TOTAL fault, then I do agree the sentence should have been more stringent.
He must have had a good defence lawyer, who could prove that maybe he was within the speed limit and it was a lone case of careless crossing (jay-walking) and thereby, not completely his fault.
But yes if he's at TOTAL fault, then I do agree the sentence should have been more stringent.