Judge to let jury hear driver's remarks in crash that killed Gaudreau brothers
‘Obviously, I had alcohol in my system.’
“I did have a couple of beers in the car.”
“It had nothing to do with me drinking some beers today. That really wasn’t the problem.”
In his own words, these were just some of the things that Sean Higgins, 44, was heard to say on police interview recordings that were played in a New Jersey courtroom last month.
And now, on Monday morning, Judge Michael Silvanio ruled those statements could be played again in court — this time for jurors at Higgins impending trial.
Higgins is facing trial on charges of aggravated manslaughter, reckless vehicular homicide and other offenses involved in the deadly Thursday, Aug. 24, 2024 crash that killed John Gaudreau, 31, and Matthew Gaudreau, 29, as they were riding their bikes north on County Route 551 in Oldmans Township.
As heard in court previously, Higgins told police the crash happened after he had been driving for over an hour and talking on the phone while drinking beers.
At some point along County Route 551, Higgins told police he got impatient with slow drivers and decided to head into the right shoulder of the roadway, striking and killing the Gaudreau brothers who were riding bikes.
Following the crash, Higgins admitted to police that he had been drinking behind the wheel.
But, late last month, Higgins attorneys argued that the statements Higgins made on police recordings should have been inadmissible in court.
As could be heard in the recordings played in court back in October, at one point in an interview with police, Higgins mentioned “I feel like I need a lawyer” when police officials requested to review his cell phone.
However, Higgins said he’d be willing to continue to talk, as long as he didn’t have to hand over his phone and the interview continued.
Higgins’ attorneys argued that his Miranda rights were violated because of that discussion.
Prosecutors countered that, in that same recording, investigators can be heard reading Higgins his rights, and he could be heard acknowledging that he understood them.
Also, as noted by Judge Silvanio, a trooper at the scene read Higgins his Miranda rights after he failed a field sobriety test.
On Monday, Higgins’ attorneys reintegrated their argument that the statements played on the recordings be inadmissible because officers should have stopped questioning Higgins the moment he requested legal representation.
But, prosecutors countered that the conversations were recorded during “investigative detentions” which do not fall under the purview of Miranda rights.
In the end, Judge Silvanio agreed.
He noted that, roadside questioning by police doesn’t fall under the purview of Miranda rights, and said that Higgins wasn’t coerced into making his statements to police that were parts of the recordings.
In fact, Slivanio said Higgins appeared to be aware and direct in all his conversations with police.
“His conversations seemed to be clear. They seemed to be lucid. They seemed to be direct answers to questions that were being asked to there would be no indication that he was confused by the questioning that was asked or he didn’t understand his surroundings or his whereabouts,” said the judge. “He freely and voluntarily conversed in engaging conversations with troopers at the roadside.”
The judge also ruled that the statements Higgins made later at a police station were also admissible as well.
Higgins next court appearance is scheduled for Dec. 15, 2025.
