Sean Higgins - Legal Proceedings

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Does a flat tire or shattered windshield qualify as significant damage? I don’t think so.

The facts will come. I’m trying to forget this is part of it because my imagination can get a little carried away trying to understand it.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

The facts will come. I’m trying to forget this is part of it because my imagination can get a little carried away trying to understand it.

I cringed when I read it. I think we are thinking the same thing when we read significant.

[OILFAN #81]

The driver who killed the Gaudreau brothers was given an offer of 35 years in prison by the prosecution but turned it down. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges and will now undergo trial.

What scum. He has shown little to no remorse. Hope he gets life.

[HOOT]

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/...ads-not-guilty

[Hockey_Ninja]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1876666004014571579

[bdubbs]

What's the longest this scumbag can be locked up for if found guilty, lawyers/legal experts?

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by bdubbs

What's the longest this scumbag can be locked up for if found guilty, lawyers/legal experts?

I thought they said he was facing 12 years max. No wonder he would turn down an “offer” of 35?

It’s up to state law…

[Jiri Hrdina]

Scum for sure, but if I were in shoes (which I would never be) I wouldn't accept 35 years either. Not much of an offer.

[Locke]

Is it weird that I find the term 'offer' kind of unusual?

"Hey bud, how about 35 years in prison?"

Uh...no thanks?

He did kill 2 people but...an 'offer?' As opposed to what?

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Locke

Is it weird that I find the term 'offer' kind of unusual?

"Hey bud, how about 35 years in prison?"

Uh...no thanks?

He did kill 2 people but...an 'offer?' As opposed to what?

Trial. An offer is supposed to take a few percent off the max in order to avoid trial, as there’s a chance of acquittal.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Trial. An offer is supposed to take a few percent off the max in order to avoid trial, as there’s a chance of acquittal.

I mean, I'm no lawyer obviously, surely theres a chance...but I cant imagine much of one.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by bdubbs

What's the longest this scumbag can be locked up for if found guilty, lawyers/legal experts?

The major indictments are:

First Degree aggravated manslaughter carries a sentence of 10 to 30 years in NJ
2nd Degree vehicular homicide carries a sentence of 5 to 10 years in NJ

He is charged twice, once for each brother.


I am not a lawyer but i believe the lighter charge of vehicular homicide is a safety net for the prosecution. It is there so that if the jury or judge believes the prosecution has not met the burden that Higgins committed aggravated manslaughter, they can still find him guilty of vehicular homicide. It is unlikely he will be sentenced for both IMO.

So if he is guilty of aggravated manslaughter x2 and the judge rules the sentences be served consecutively, he is looking at a maximum of 60 years.

I suspect he rejected the 35 year offer because he is hoping that he only gets found guilty of vehicular homicide which would be a maximum of 20 years.

edit:
He could also hope the judge gives him closer to the minimum 2x10 years if he is found guilty of vehicular homicide

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Locke

I mean, I'm no lawyer obviously, surely theres a chance...but I cant imagine much of one.

You have days and days to use evidence to persuade 12 people just like the other side has.

Defense attorneys typically make more money than prosecutors because they are simply better. The state obviously knows the criminal defense attorneys and will typically issue increasingly attractive offers based on their skill and propensity to push for trial.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Scum for sure, but if I were in shoes (which I would never be) I wouldn't accept 35 years either. Not much of an offer.

He has two children. That has to be part of his thinking.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Defense attorneys typically make more money than prosecutors because they are simply better.

They make more money because they usually have a private practice (and may accept legal aid clients). Prosecutors are civil servants and are paid by the government. I would not say defence lawyers are better. Many prosecutors go on to become Judges.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Locke

I mean, I'm no lawyer obviously, surely theres a chance...but I cant imagine much of one.

They’ll probably be relying on police not following proper procedures or violating his rights and stuff like that. I don’t think anyone has any doubts that this guy did it. I’m not sure what the rules are as far as how many times someone can be charged with the same crime if the case gets thrown out.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Locke

I mean, I'm no lawyer obviously, surely theres a chance...but I cant imagine much of one.

Not much chance of an acquittal. But certainly a chance of a better sentence.

I agree it's an odd offer. 35 years for a 43 year old. Even assuming a lot of time off for good behaviour, etc, it's a long haul, and he'd get the same time off in a sentence by the court. I do fund it odd that offers are disclosed to the court.

[Nyah]

Defense lawyers, in a statement, said they hope to prove that the deaths stemmed not from any “malfeasance” but from “a combination of uniquely unfortunate circumstances unlikely to ever occur again.

Prosecutors say the married father of two — who worked for an addiction treatment company — had a history of road rage and was impaired that day after drinking five or six beers. He said he had been driving around for two hours, sometimes talking by phone with a friend, after an upsetting conversation with his mother.

Hilarious. The guy has an alleged history of road rage, but it's ok. It'll never happen again. Also weird use of the work malfeasance?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/gaudre...ence-1.7167341

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Not much chance of an acquittal. But certainly a chance of a better sentence.

I agree it's an odd offer. 35 years for a 43 year old. Even assuming a lot of time off for good behaviour, etc, it's a long haul, and he'd get the same time off in a sentence by the court. I do fund it odd that offers are disclosed to the court.

Thats all I'm saying. I just find it odd.

I mean...and I understand this is cynical as all hell, but 35 years for a 43 year old? You might as well roll your dice.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Nyah

Hilarious. The guy has an alleged history of road rage, but it's ok. It'll never happen again. Also weird use of the work malfeasance?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/gaudre...ence-1.7167341

Yeah, it was definitely malfeasance. I get what they are trying to say - he wasn't out to hurt the Gaudreau brothers. But if he was the charges would be different anyway.