The problem lies in a case from a couple month ago where a white teen (Ethan Couch) killed four pedestrians while driving drunk and then basically walked away when his lawyers argued he was a victim of affluenza. (Affluenza: unable to link bad behavior with consequences due to being taught that wealth buys privilege)
It's further complicated by the mother of the victim in the Brent case. She's been very forgiving and could possibly even testify in Brent's defense in the sentencing phase of the trial.
If you give Brent the maximum sentence or, for that matter, any type of lengthy sentence. This will definitely become a matter of race in the eyes of some people and you'll have some politician or the NAACP fired up. On the other hand, if you just give Brent probation, you've now set a precedent with two high-profile cases in a state that isn't really known for being "easy" on lawbreakers and you're probably going to have Mothers Against Drunk Driving on your ass.
I'm not saying that Brent shouldn't do time for his crime, but i know I'm not the only who sees the problem that has been set up here. What's a jury/judge to do?