I am not going to make a judgement on the morality, but this is not surprising.
Awards for loss of life are actually codified in case law as being vastly smaller awards than the award for loss of limbs, senses, etc.
It is somewhat logical since the primary injured (the dead) can't be made whole. Contrast this to someone injured but not dead - they will have to live with the injury for the rest of their life. Case in point - this girl.
This is why disability policies are more expensive for higher income individuals. Presumably, the injured and his/her family depends on that income to live, and the income loss must be made whole.
Awards for loss of life are actually codified in case law as being vastly smaller awards than the award for loss of limbs, senses, etc.
It is somewhat logical since the primary injured (the dead) can't be made whole. Contrast this to someone injured but not dead - they will have to live with the injury for the rest of their life. Case in point - this girl.
This is why disability policies are more expensive for higher income individuals. Presumably, the injured and his/her family depends on that income to live, and the income loss must be made whole.