Though sometimes anomalies occur regardless of trends per se, it is usually sometimes more fruitful to look at an event as a new event on long timeline.
Bo's situation in China is certainly no different. When one looks at Chinese history one begins to perhaps gain a better understanding of what Bo's sentence means, and doesn't mean per se.
China has a long history of invoking Athenian style "banishment", to sort out political problems. For usually in any power center there are at least two positions concerning how to govern an organization/country/nation state etc. The Athenians realized that in order to prevent those not in power from constantly obstructing the works of whoever was in power, they would usually need to banish people. The way this worked was that essentially, whoever lost a "presidential election" per se, was accused of some trumped up charge that "everyone" was guilty of anyway, and then banished. This left the coast clear for the winning party to do its thing per se. This was sort of a gentlemanly agreement one could say to keep the wheels of government working.
This banishment usually wasn't very long term, and since it happened to elites usually, with royal foreign connections, it usually meant a sabbatical at the palace of neighboring king/queen so and so.
China has decided to do its own banishment a little differently. For, during the early communist age in China it was quite common to be banished to the country side for disagreeing with the current "flavor of the week" political movement, or for having the past said something publicly that would go against said movement, or for having been even loosely allied with someone who was advocating for political imperatives contradictory to those currently being supported by the local top of the pyramid per se. For further research on this you may look no further than the current Chinese premiere's background, for he has the "people's touch" for a reason, namely that he was the son of someone who was similarly banished and hence grew up in the country side for a while. As China evolved as a society, it learned to cut down on the punishment for these sorts of things. For example, movements against entire age's of history, have now transformed into not so subtle silence on key events like T-Square for example.
Needless to say if this is the case with Bo, it may mean that he'll be "back in service" in maybe 10-15 years, if it was a legitimate trial, than who knows. Perhaps it should also be noted, that this current schism is essentially the same schism that has often divided China, which is the Maoist vs Internationalist schism. Mao is a unique leader, his agrarian focused marxist principles(shaped by his adoption of Marxist ideologies not in Paris like many other international marxists, but instead amongst the rural north of his own country), are different than his USSR counterparts who instead favor mobilization of urban "proletariat" namely factory workers for example, and hence Mao's Marxism is very introverted per se. The later Chinese communism with its most recent international perspective is perhaps more commonly associated with Mao's successor I believe Mr. Deng Xiaoping, who really began the various movements which opened up the country. Either way, I believe Mr. Xiaoping himself was exiled at least once, so this whole banishment/exile thing is nothing new to governments, especially those in modern China.
Not to stir the pot per se, but perhaps our current conundrum with reoccurring threats of government shut downs kind of embellishes the point of why exiles/banishment were found to be accommodating ways of dealing with otherwise intractable schisms per se, existing within a governments way of operating per se. Either way, its interesting to note per se, that our checks and balances system, can form walls which can maintain stability, or thoroughly obstruct any political figures plans, depending on the machinations of the day. Either way, I guess these are questions that may be aided by Google's new constitution search engine however one looks at it.
Thanks for your readership,