Gaudreau Brothers Negligent Homicide (OT)

[julio]

He pretty much couldn't have sideswiped them, if he was passing a vehicle on the right on that stretch of road. There's virtually no shoulder.

[zambonir]

Yeah he plowed into them from behind. Just ugly.

Oh, I absolutely agree that this is how things are. I am not speaking of how they are, just how I THINK they should be.

Well, we are on the same page there, that's why I would include cyclists and pedestrians and impinging on bike lane and pedestrian crossings as automatic situations for harsher penalties (which in some cases there are, and obviously here there was no lane or even shoulder). Not to punish this guy specifically but to make all of us think harder about how we drive when they are on the road.

Another sad/ironic detail: the guy was employed at a drug and alcohol rehab facility.

During Friday's first appearance hearing, Judge Michael Silvanio explained to Higgins the charges against him, adding that two counts of second-degree vehicular homicide each carry a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.

Other charges include reckless driving, possession of an open container, improper passing and consuming alcohol in a motor vehicle.

Suspected drunk driver accused of killing NHL star is member of US Army in NJ

[LegoDoom]

I think you missed an important point. From what I read he passed on the RIGHT, not the left. The 2nd car moved over to pass the bikes and this guy passed that car on the right and killed the bike riders.

Yes, I know he tried to pass on the right. You are missing the point that he thought the car was moving over to prevent him from passing and not because there were bikers on the shoulder.

I agree it was reckless and he was under the influence as well as him being a likely bad driver. As someone that has witnessed a driver under the influence killing other people, I don't think this is nearly in the area of lock them up for life.

[LegoDoom]

Yeah he plowed into them from behind. Just ugly.

Is this correct? If the lead car is moving over for them, then I assumed it was likely that he could have hit them while moving over and not from behind.

[zambonir]

Not sure how you are envisioning it (including how you think two cyclists could have died by being hit from the side versus being hit and then run over which is how I see it in my mind). But it's in the story I just posted.

_Police say Sean Higgins, 43, of Woodstown, was traveling north on Pennsville Auburn Road in a Jeep Grand Cherokee when he allegedly attempted to pass a slower-moving sedan and SUV.

Police say Higgins entered the southbound lane of the roadway and passed the sedan.

When he attempted to reenter the northbound lane, police say the SUV in front of him moved into the middle of the roadway, splitting the north and south lanes in order to safely pass two bicyclists on the right side of the road.

Higgins then attempted to pass the SUV on the right and struck the Gaudreau brothers from behind, troopers said.

In the end I don't think it matters how he hit them or what he thought the other car was doing or whether he knew the cyclists were there. It all started with his drunkenness, aggression and recklessness. And they're dead.

[bkeich]

I think you missed an important point. From what I read he passed on the RIGHT, not the left. The 2nd car moved over to pass the bikes and this guy passed that car on the right and killed the bike riders.

Yes, I know he tried to pass on the right. You are missing the point that he thought the car was moving over to prevent him from passing and not because there were bikers on the shoulder.

I agree it was reckless and he was under the influence as well as him being a likely bad driver. As someone that has witnessed a driver under the influence killing other people, I don't think this is nearly in the area of lock them up for life.

I saw that he thought that the guy was basically trying to block him. To me that makes it even worse.. “this person is trying to stop me from passing them.. I will go by them faster and on the right, that will teach them. “. His statement that the he thought the person was trying to block him makes it even more reckless.

I am sorry you had to see that, sadly me too. It is horrible, once again sorry it happened to you (and obviously the victim).

[LegoDoom]

In the end I don't think it matters how he hit them or what he thought the other car was doing or whether he knew the cyclists were there. It all started with his drunkenness, aggression and recklessness. And they're dead.

It kind of matters. Cyclists don't have lights on the side of them, but they should from behind. If the lead car pulls over to pass them and the drunk moves to the right to pass the lead car, then he definitely could have hit them from the side.

[LegoDoom]

I think you missed an important point. From what I read he passed on the RIGHT, not the left. The 2nd car moved over to pass the bikes and this guy passed that car on the right and killed the bike riders.

Yes, I know he tried to pass on the right. You are missing the point that he thought the car was moving over to prevent him from passing and not because there were bikers on the shoulder.

I agree it was reckless and he was under the influence as well as him being a likely bad driver. As someone that has witnessed a driver under the influence killing other people, I don't think this is nearly in the area of lock them up for life.

I saw that he thought that the guy was basically trying to block him. To me that makes it even worse.. “this person is trying to stop me from passing them.. I will go by them faster and on the right, that will teach them. “. His statement that the he thought the person was trying to block him makes it even more reckless.

I am sorry you had to see that, sadly me too. It is horrible, once again sorry it happened to you (and obviously the victim).

How does it make it worse? If he was drunk and thought the shoulder was a lane, then that would make it better?

He was drunk and his explanation actually makes sense. Definitely punish him and I'd prefer if he wasn't allowed to drive when/if he gets out, but life? I just don't think that's right.

[Docs]

Scroll up, Julio posted a picture of the road there is no shoulder. If he side swiped them i would say maybe it was in a blind spot, he hit them from behind which is where he should be looking. There’s no defense for what he did.

I think the point is that you should never pass someone on the right especially when there isn’t even a lane.

[zambonir]

It makes it worse because he kept piling on the reckless acts and poor decisions. He likely shouldn't have been passing in the first place, and it was illegal for him to pass on the right at all on this particular road, even if cyclists weren't there.

Legally it doesn't matter, I don't think the other counts are likely to increase the time he does for vehicular homicide, unless he actually goes to trial in which case they will try to hit him with every possible day he can serve on every possible charge (and he won't be eligible for parole until he's done 85% of it). More likely the charge will actually still be downgraded, or he'll plea to this one if the sentence isn't maxed.

[LegoDoom]

You can easily hit someone from the side when changing lanes. That isn't side swiping. You also can't see them with a car blocking you.

I am not saying it wasn't stupid or that he doesn't deserve a strong sentence. I have even said he's likely a bad driver multiple times. So I am not sure what point you think I am not getting.

[LegoDoom]

It makes it worse because he kept piling on the reckless acts and poor decisions. He likely shouldn't have been passing in the first place, and it was illegal for him to pass on the right at all on this particular road, even if cyclists weren't there.

And my point is that his recall of the situation actually makes sense. A drunk driver driving on the shoulder the entire time is worse.

[Docs]

You can easily hit someone from the side when changing lanes. That isn't side swiping. You also can't see them with a car blocking you.

I agree but that isn’t what happened. The police report says he hit them from behind.

[bkeich]

I think you missed an important point. From what I read he passed on the RIGHT, not the left. The 2nd car moved over to pass the bikes and this guy passed that car on the right and killed the bike riders.

Yes, I know he tried to pass on the right. You are missing the point that he thought the car was moving over to prevent him from passing and not because there were bikers on the shoulder.

I agree it was reckless and he was under the influence as well as him being a likely bad driver. As someone that has witnessed a driver under the influence killing other people, I don't think this is nearly in the area of lock them up for life.

I saw that he thought that the guy was basically trying to block him. To me that makes it even worse.. “this person is trying to stop me from passing them.. I will go by them faster and on the right, that will teach them. “. His statement that the he thought the person was trying to block him makes it even more reckless.

I am sorry you had to see that, sadly me too. It is horrible, once again sorry it happened to you (and obviously the victim).

How does it make it worse? If he was drunk and thought the shoulder was a lane, then that would make it better?

He was drunk and his explanation actually makes sense. Definitely punish him and I'd prefer if he wasn't allowed to drive when/if he gets out, but life? I just don't think that's right.

I don’t know how you stop him from driving when he gets out? Do you really think taking his license would do that? How many people drive with a suspended / no license? It is just a fine.

Does he sound like a guy that cares that he doesn’t have a license?

I think we all agree this is just horrible. Maybe I should just stop responding…. I didn’t mean to drag everyone into a philosophical discussion about this guy who isn’t worth our time.

[zambonir]

Thumbs up to the thread move, thumbs down to "accidental."

[julio]

How's that?

[zambonir]

Why We Say “Bicycle Accidents” Are Not Accidents | Bicycle Law

Why You Should Call Your Bike Crash a “Crash” and Not an “Accident” - Bay Area...

Do not call it a "bicycle accident". Do not call it a "bike crash".

Johnny Gaudreau and his brother were struck and killed by the driver of an SUV.

Words matter.

— Indy Pedestrian Safety Crisis ( @IndyPedCrisis ) August 30, 2024

(Haha well I like the rewrite, even if "alleged" might be necessary.")

[LegoDoom]

Does he sound like a guy that cares that he doesn’t have a license?

I don't think any of us know the answer to this question. He stayed on scene and admitted to drinking. That sounds like he might care.

I am not advocating that he should be given a slap on the wrist. It was definitely reckless driving and if you are going to pull off a maneuver that he did, then passing on the left should was likely the better idea as you can see what is coming at you.

I think there is a high probability that he didn't see the bikers (because they were blocked by the cars he was trying to pass) and hit them crossing over or not having enough time to brake (which is worsened by his impairment).

He seems like a bad driver (this was in NJ) and made an incredibly stupid decision. I just don't agree that he disregarded bikers because I doubt he ever saw them. If you want to say the way he was driving was the reason, then I think that is correct, but some people are treating this like ran over them while driving on the shoulder... whereas it sounds to me like he swerved to the right to pass and the bikers were right there.

Just put yourself into a situation where you are a car or two behind and see the lead car swerve to the left but have no idea why they did that. We have much more information than what happened at the time.

[bkeich]

If you are driving along and see the car in front of you swerve to the left, so you “decide” to swerve right, but stay on the road as you say, you will hit something EVERY time. The car in front of you swerved for a reason.

But, that doesn’t matter, because that isn’t his story

He was trying to pass (illegally) and when the car in front of him (he thought) tried to block him he took the insane move of trying to blow by him on the wrong (wildly illegal) side.

Wanton Disregard.

How many illegal things can one do that end up in a very foreseeable result before that person is simply responsible for the result. If you break 4-5 laws and the result is someone’s death, that is murder to me, even if it was not your intent.

Drunk
Illegal pass (not legal to pass at all on this road)
Passing on the right (almost always illegal)
Speeding
Aggressive driving (had already passed one car)
Most likely leaving the road surface (had to unless the other car was completely in the left lane)
Etc.

[LegoDoom]

If you are driving along and see the car in front of you swerve to the left, so you “decide” to swerve right, but stay on the road as you say, you will hit something EVERY time. The car in front of you swerved for a reason.

But, that doesn’t matter, because that isn’t his story

He was trying to pass (illegally) and when the car in front of him (he thought) tried to block him he took the insane move of trying to blow by him on the wrong (wildly illegal) side.

And for all you know, it could have been to avoid a skunk. He interpreted it as the driver trying to stop him from passing. We have the advantage of knowing details after the fact.

He obviously deserves a harsh punishment, but I don't think life is correct.