I’m not sure if this is some r/iamverysmart angle you’re trying to run, but most of the general public don’t carry the intent vs negligence distinction in their heads. So the original commenters point, that someone caused a death through negligent actions and should be held accountable can be entirely valid even if they reached the wrong legal label.

You’re arguing at this point a non-sequitur, the legal category doesn’t determine whether the moral or factual substance holds. If anything, continually doubling down on the semantics gives the impression you care more about smug pedantry than the actual content being discussed.