I'm not keen on the idea that sentencing should (heavily) take into account events that happen as an unintended consequence of a crime. I know this won't be a popular view, but I would also apply that to things like drink driving and the crime of manslaughter. Just as an example, if an individual punches someone in anger and victim falls, bangs his head and as a result dies in hospital 7 days later, he would probably be charged with manslaughter. But had the doctors done something differently and the victim had lived, the individual would be charged with a much lesser crime, even though the actual crime (both the action and the intent) is exactly the same. To punish someone for an unintended consequence of his or her crime is essentially punishing him/her for something beyond his/her control. The only logical reason I can think for it is to instil some sense of revenge-type justice into the minds of the victim's family, which is something that I don't think should have any place in the modern justice system anyway.