Not one word about any monetary compensation to the owners of the homes and property that were damaged. Why not let him work a few years (after his release) to pay off the damage he caused?
You're right. The first concern a property owner that has suffered a loss would be to regain wholeness. To gain restitution for their pain and suffering. Any person that had their car or home destroyed by an environmentalist (or any criminal) would first be concerned with gaining restitution for themselves. Later on, the second thing they would be concerned with is stopping the environmentalist (criminal) from harming even more people.
There are basically two excuses for why most media sources prioritize on the "stop the criminal" aspect and not the "gain restitution aspect". 1) "stop the criminal" caters to, fosters and maintains a collectivist group think mentality and 2) if the media source was to highlight the "gain restitution aspect" -- individual rights orientated/grounded -- that would contradict their first priority. That first priority is to support a collectivist, group-think mentality.
The best way to protect individuals and society is to ensure that restitution has top priority. Retiming wholeness for honest individuals is more valuable than punishing the few (by ratio) criminals. Also, perhaps the best help/education for the criminal would come from having to "pay" his victim restitution for his criminal acts Prison is not a means of reform or education. It is a means to keep dangerous people out of society.
On a wider scope, nearly all media sources fully support punishing Saddam Hussein while most major media sources give at best minimal support to the Iraqi citizens gaining restitution. Major media sources "gleefully" report the most resent deaths in the somber tone of fighting terrorism when in reality each death is a very sad loss in the fight for freedom and restitution.