The language is very telling: "a father who killed his nine-year old daughter".
What's interesting to note is that the article only mentions the mother is passing, that she "slammed" the sentence. Did she think the sentence was too harsh, too light? Which was it?
I would guess that, since they both shared the same surname, that the couple are still married and that she doesn't believe her husband, who obviously engaged in risky behaviour, should go to jail for as long as he has been sentenced.
Remember, there are two reasons to send a person to jail: to punish and to rehabilitate. On one hand, the father in this case possibly should be punished, but using the same line of logic that people argue about women who've lost their children due to their own mistakes, "isn't losing his daughter punishment enough"?
As for rehabilitation, firstly I doubt he'll want to even look at another buggy, let alone do anything similar, so I doubt that the probably of re-offending is very high.
So the taxpayers have to pay for this guy to sit in a cell to think about what he's done and his family has to find a way to cope without him for longer than a lot of violent and sexual offenders get sentenced to for purposely committing crimes.
Oh well, I guess that's just par for the course.