Killer drivers, feckless courts

In the news this morning was an all too typical headline. A verdict had been reached in the case of the young male who drove around a corner at high speed, lost control and plowed into some people waiting at the bus stop. One elderly woman died and another was crippled.They were just minding their own business and doing nobody any harm. The young man was given a suspended sentence. He said he was sorry and that not a day goes by that he doesn't think about it. Poor boy, and I guess the old gal was 85 anyway and was going to die pretty soon, so what's the big deal. Why ruin a young man's life over such a little thing. And the lady's granddaughter was in a forgiving mood. Not so the other elderly victim who, though still alive, can no longer dance because of the injuries she suffered. This event took place in Victoria in 2005.
Another case of an innocent person killed by a car was settled in court last week in Vancouver and while the Victoria driver was careless and irresponsible at least he didn't deliberately kill his victim. Not so this other incident. The young man had filled up with gas at a service station and decided to drive off without paying. The only problem with his plan was that the gas station attendant was blocking his way. Well, it would be a problem for most of us, even if we were the type to drive off without paying but for this fellow it was no problem at all. He just ran over him. The initial impact didn't kill the attendant. Death took a little longer as he was dragged under the car for the next few blocks leaving bits and pieces of his anatomy on the pavement. He had a little time to think about it before he died, and maybe even briefly hoped that someone would save him. Our enlightened judiciary seemed to be more interested in the sordid details of the young driver's unhappy life, and his Native Indian ethnicity was also a factor to be taken into account. Written into the lawbooks somewhere it is apparently asserted that Native Indians are not to be penalized as severely as others convicted of the same crimes. The reasoning behind this policy escapes me. Could it be that Indians are too dumb to know the difference between right and wrong? Sounds pretty insulting to me. If I was an Indian I would want to know why I was singled out to be incapable of being responsible for my actions. (In fact since my ancestors have been in North America since the 1600's I probably do have a drop or two of native blood in me...at least I hope I have)
As a cab driver I am very aware of the fact that the courts don't seem to much care when a citizen's life is terminated by a criminal act. All their sympathies seem to go to the criminal. Maybe this indifference to the fate of us ordinary folk is because we don't seem quite real to the denizens of the legal world. I wonder why that is. It doesn't seem very 'just' to me.