Sean Higgins' attorneys files a motion to dismiss charges- Claims the Gaudreau brothers were more intoxicated than Sean Higgins was. | Page 14 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

Sean Higgins' attorneys files a motion to dismiss charges- Claims the Gaudreau brothers were more intoxicated than Sean Higgins was.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Said it last time this topic popped up. Defence attorneys are a check on the legal system. Their job is to make sure law enforcement and the DA have done theirs properly. If the person is truly guilty, a defence attorney does their job properly, and so do law enforcement/the prosecutor, then the person will go to prison and will not have an avenue to win an appeal. If any of those three fail at their job, it means the accused could either walk free or have an avenue to appeal.

Criminal defence lawyers don't see their job as defending criminals. They see it as ensuring law enforcement and the prosecutor are doing their jobs and not skipping any steps.

You can call them scummy or evil or whatever you want, but the legal system would be absolutely rampant with corruption and innocents jailed without them.
Thanks for your help. We're doing great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WaitingForThatCab
No way he gets life

If Gaudreau wasn’t an NHl hockey player and he mowed down a couple everyday folks the sad reality is he likely serves little time at all. Motorists who kill cyclists very rarely get severe punishment. There’s usually the unspoken implication that the cyclist is partially to blame simply for riding on the road.
Sure, when alcohol isn't involved.

Unfortunately it was here.
 
I don't understand the benefit the defense is hoping to get that his BAC was only .087%

It seems a lot worse actually that he's so reckless and indifferent to the lives of others while being only slightly impaired that he killed 2 people. Far more of a danger to society
 
Yikes some of the responses in this thread are crazy. .8 is like a beer or two.

The brothers intoxicated has bearing.

Sad that alcohol caused it
Higgins was literally drinking a beer in his car at the time he ran the Gaudreau brothers over, and he had "five or six beers, but not in two hours". He admitted it to police, in his own words. He tested over the New Jersey legal limit with 0.87.

More than that, however, was the fact that Higgins drove like an absolute road raging maniac, swerving into their lane and running them over. The Gaudreau brothers being intoxicated didn't matter because they were apparently following cycling laws, not swerving in front of cars, etc.

They would not have been killed if Higgins wasn't swerving into their lane like a maniac, and he has a history of road rage.

I don't blame the defense attorney for trying every avenue; that's what you're supposed to do as a defense attorney, to give your client every avenue, so that if they are guilty, there's no doubt about it. Checks and balances and all that.

But Higgins is far from a sympathetic figure. I feel for his family, I especially feel for the Gaudreaus, but as someone who has lost a close friend to a drunk driver, I have less than zero sympathy for Higgins himself. I just want the defense to try everything reasonable, so that if he is found guilty, he spends a good portion of his life in prison.
 
The article I read, said something along the lines of a possible 70 year sentence for double vehicular manslaughter, after Higgins and his team declined a plea deal that would've given him 35 years.

But you're right, even 35 is far more than I've seen some get for far worse when it comes to fatal alcholol-related crashes.

I'll say what I said a year ago, he probably gets less than 10, and then gets off for good behaviour.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Pepper
  • Like
Reactions: Hippasus
Higgins was literally drinking a beer in his car at the time he ran the Gaudreau brothers over, and he had "five or six beers, but not in two hours". He admitted it to police, in his own words. He tested over the New Jersey legal limit with 0.87.

More than that, however, was the fact that Higgins drove like an absolute road raging maniac, swerving into their lane and running them over. The Gaudreau brothers being intoxicated didn't matter because they were apparently following cycling laws, not swerving in front of cars, etc.

They would not have been killed if Higgins wasn't swerving into their lane like a maniac, and he has a history of road rage.

I don't blame the defense attorney for trying every avenue; that's what you're supposed to do as a defense attorney, to give your client every avenue, so that if they are guilty, there's no doubt about it. Checks and balances and all that.

But Higgins is far from a sympathetic figure. I feel for his family, I especially feel for the Gaudreaus, but as someone who has lost a close friend to a drunk driver, I have less than zero sympathy for Higgins himself. I just want the defense to try everything reasonable, so that if he is found guilty, he spends a good portion of his life in prison.

Exactly.

Getting lost in this discussion of alcohol is that the Gaudreaus were seen riding single file on the side of the road as they should be, which is why a car was moving into the other lane (as it should be) to pass them, when Higgins swerved to pass the car on the right hand side striking the Gaudreaus.

And not to be morbid but for two healthy young men to both be killed like that shows just how hard and reckless Higgins struck them. In many incidents where cyclists are hit by a car, the first cyclist may be killed but other riders often survive because the driver has made some response to the first impact.
 
No way he gets life

If Gaudreau wasn’t an NHl hockey player and he mowed down a couple everyday folks the sad reality is he likely serves little time at all. Motorists who kill cyclists very rarely get severe punishment. There’s usually the unspoken implication that the cyclist is partially to blame simply for riding on the road.
Life would be the maximum, which would be my case considering he took two lives rather than one. But it's true it's possible he doesn't. If that's the case after his jail time is served he shouldn't be allowed behind a vehicle ever again.
 
Here's the thing - yes, the victim's own intoxication can be a factor. But based on all of the reporting thus far, there is an independent eyewitness and forensic evidence showing the dude swerved to the right and tried to illegally pass an SUV in the shoulder because he thought they were trying to block him from passing (when they were actually moving over to give the Gaudreaus more room on the right.) Were the Gaudreaeus supposed to have eyes in the back of their heads?

It's kind of like saying, "Sure I mowed you down in a crosswalk when you had the right of way. But you were drunk when you crossed the crosswalk..." (Oh also I was drunk too.)

The defense won't hold up. But yes, as others have said, the lawyers do their jobs by throwing everything out there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Ad

Ad