[News] Confirmed: Johnny Gaudreau and brother Matt have passed away

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Icantwhisper

Typically accidents caused while on your bike are covered by home insurance, you can let that go now.

I was actually sort of commenting in favour of cyclists. I find it odd that they're required to be considered vehicles but require no license plate, no training to operate and dubious insurance.

Sure, it might be covered by home insurance, but what if you dont have a home? I dont think renter's insurance would cover it?

Anyways, we're digressing from the point. Yes, there can be consequences for biking while intoxicated, but in no way does that excuse this guy.

From all accounts they were safely biking on the shoulder.

[the-rasta-masta]

I had a feeling this would become a part of this loser's argument. I mentioned earlier in the thread in the days after this happened that Ryan Whitney mentioned on the Spittin Chiclets Podcast that the brothers were doing the right thing by hopping on a bike and not driving themselves, or something along those lines. It made me think maybe they were drinking themselves and this would be some form of defence this murderer would take. Awful for the family to now have this narrative involved in the memory of their two children but I hope most people see through what this guy is trying to do. Glad to hear it's not illegal to ride a bike while drinking in NJ.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Yamer

Google tells me you can't receive a DUI on a bicycle in New Jersey.

I think you can on an E-bike or motorized, I know of a fellow who got a DUI driving a golf cart, he was acting like a fool on the golf course, someone called the cops and because the course crossed a public road the cops waited for him.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

They did what that guy should've - got on a bicycle instead.

Someone should pose the reverse situation to him. Say they'd all been drinking and they drove while he got on a bike and was minding his own business on the shoulder of the road, and they came blasting up the right side and plowed him over and killed him.

Does his consumption of alcohol factor in any way shape or form into the reckless decision of the driver?

By all accounts it doesn't sound like they were anywhere they shouldn't have been as cyclists at that moment, so this pitiful attempt at a defense should fall on deaf ears.

[T-Dog]

Admins: Can we move all of this discussion about the legal proceedings to the thread for that in the off-topic forum? It would be nice if we could keep this thread for the more positive stories about the Gaudreau's.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by T-Dog

Admins: Can we move all of this discussion about the legal proceedings to the thread for that in the off-topic forum? It would be nice if we could keep this thread for the more positive stories about the Gaudreau's.

There is already a thread there too.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Rhett44

It's a bad defense anyways. If the guy was sober and not driving reckless, and 2 cyclists weaved out in front of him he might have a case.

But he was intoxicated, driving a motor vehicle illegally. He illegally passed a vehicle in front of him on the passenger side, striking 2 cyclists who were in the correct position on the road.

There is literally no case here, it is black and white. He killed 2 people and is entirely his fault.

It's not a defense. The defense is asking the court to suppress the driver's BAC level as well as to suppress statements made on scene by the driver in order to prevent them from coming into evidence in front of a jury.

It doesn't make much logical sense to me, but I didn't go to law school.

[Jason14h]

Why would them being drunken in any way allow the defendants Blood Alcohol level to be suppressed as evidence ?

What am I missing here ?

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Why would them being drunken in any way allow the defendants Blood Alcohol level to be suppressed as evidence ?

What am I missing here ?

Yeah, I don't know either. If it was improperly or unscientifically obtained then it would seem to me that there would be a much stronger argument for suppression available.

Whatever the Gaudreaus' level was at seems unrelated.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by butterfly

It's not a defense. The defense is asking the court to suppress the driver's BAC level as well as to suppress statements made on scene by the driver in order to prevent them from coming into evidence in front of a jury.

It doesn't make much logical sense to me, but I didn't go to law school.

I did. And it still makes no sense. But then again he's desperate.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I did. And it still makes no sense. But then again he's desperate.

It sounds to me like the defence is at the ‘hammer on the table’ stage.

[AustinL_NHL]

You just know Johnny & Matty Gaudreau were upstairs play calling the Eagles to the Super Bowl.

I hope the Gaudreau's are having one of their most joyous, celebratory nights of the last 6 months.

[rhino]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

They did what that guy should've - got on a bicycle instead.

Someone should pose the reverse situation to him. Say they'd all been drinking and they drove while he got on a bike and was minding his own business on the shoulder of the road, and they came blasting up the right side and plowed him over and killed him.

Does his consumption of alcohol factor in any way shape or form into the reckless decision of the driver?

By all accounts it doesn't sound like they were anywhere they shouldn't have been as cyclists at that moment, so this pitiful attempt at a defense should fall on deaf ears.

Now understand I am not defending the driver but do you honestly think getting on a bike drunk is a smart move?

[bc-chris]

Originally Posted by AustinL_NHL

You just know Johnny & Matty Gaudreau were upstairs play calling the Eagles to the Super Bowl.

I hope the Gaudreau's are having one of their most joyous, celebratory nights of the last 6 months.

i have zero interest in the nfl but when i saw that philly was in the finals i was sure hoping they'd win.

i'm sure it's bitter sweet in the Gaudreau house tonight... thrilled that their team won, but sorrow that they couldn't share that joy with their boys.

it's kind of like the first christmas without a loved one... celebrating with family and friends, but that empty chair puts a knot in your gut.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by rhino

Now understand I am not defending the driver but do you honestly think getting on a bike drunk is a smart move?

On the long list of stupid things a young person can do, this is very far down that list. Like near the bottom.

[butterfly]

The whole thing has very little to do with anybody being drunk. The guy could have stayed home for half an hour and been .07 instead of .08. Nothing magical happens between those arbitrary numbers.

He was driving like an aggressive madman if the allegations are anywhere close to being true. Who passes on the right shoulder?

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by rhino

Now understand I am not defending the driver but do you honestly think getting on a bike drunk is a smart move?

Would you rather them be o let's say driving drunk? Them drunk on a bike had no bearing on the out come . They were are not dead from blowing a light or swerving into traffic.

I have been riding a bike daily for 13 years sans car in all sorts of states.theirs you can ride a bike perfectly or you can not and It's a walk home. Both states don't matter when a guy pulls up on the shoulder of a road and illegally plows into you for non emergency evasive monuvers.

Whether they were drunknor not his actions as a impaired or not impaired driver were un warranted.


To answer your question being on a bike isn't always the best move ( trust me I know) but your only going to hurt yourself in 99% of situations . It's not some 3000lb machine that requires minimal effort to control at speeds that can kill in mere seconds of acceleration.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by butterfly

The whole thing has very little to do with anybody being drunk. The guy could have stayed home for half an hour and been .07 instead of .08. Nothing magical happens between those arbitrary numbers.

He was driving like an aggressive madman if the allegations are anywhere close to being true. Who passes on the right shoulder?

Oy vey...is your whole thing just to say things that are blatantly false now?

Yes, of course it matters. As a central nervous system depressant, one of the key things that alcohol does is impair judgement and higher reasoning skills. that can cause someone to drive overly aggressively among many other impairments. Just because there's an arbitrary line where they can charge you with a crime or not, doesn't mean that a single drink won't impair your abilities and higher reasoning.

I get upset when people have a single drink and then drive because of the effects it has. I also get upset when people smoke weed and drive for the same reasons. There's too much at stake when you get behind the wheel of a ton of metal traveling at high velocity. Just plan ahead FFS.

[Flamesfan05]

They are just trying to find way out of it.

At the end of the day, he still broke several traffic law. It’s just how much he has to pay. I am afraid with the justice system it won’t be as much as he deserves

[mennoknight]

Originally Posted by butterfly

The whole thing has very little to do with anybody being drunk. The guy could have stayed home for half an hour and been .07 instead of .08. Nothing magical happens between those arbitrary numbers.

He was driving like an aggressive madman if the allegations are anywhere close to being true. Who passes on the right shoulder?

I dunno, a drunk guy?