A New Jersey man, Sean Higgins, who stands accused of fatally hitting NHL player Johnny Gaudreau and his brother, is challenging the accuracy of his blood alcohol content (BAC) test. Experts have suggested that this test, which indicated a BAC of 0.087—above the legal limit of 0.08—was flawed. Higgins’ lawyer argues that the actual BAC should be recorded at 0.075.
Legal professionals in New Jersey agree that the validity of the blood test could significantly impact the case. Higgins’ defense has brought in a toxicology expert who believes that the initial plasma test results were inaccurate and that his BAC was indeed below the legal limit.
A attorney specializing in drunk-driving cases, Anthony Vecchio, pointed out the potential issues with plasma tests, stressing that whole blood is the proper method for these tests. Another attorney, Donnie Epstein, expressed concern over the prosecution’s decision to rely on plasma results.
Salem County Prosecutor Michael Mestern dismissed claims of test inaccuracies, arguing that his office has more than enough evidence to secure a conviction, regardless of the blood test’s reliability.
The charges against Higgins include two counts of reckless vehicular homicide, two counts of first-degree aggravated manslaughter, leaving the scene of an accident, and tampering with evidence. If convicted, he could face up to 72 years in prison due to the incident on August 29, 2024, where the brothers were riding bicycles after a family event.
While experts concur that the blood test method used raises concerns, they do not anticipate the case will be dismissed entirely. There may be a chance, however, that defense attorneys can prevent the blood evidence from being introduced at trial.
Defense attorney Jonathan Bruno noted the respected status of Higgins’ toxicology expert and suggested that the use of plasma could be a strong argument in the defense’s favor. Still, he cautioned that even without the blood evidence, the state might still prove its case through witness testimonies, including Higgins’ own admission about his alcohol consumption.
Mestern stated that even in the absence of blood test results, other evidence could still lead to a conviction, referencing the body camera footage where Higgins acknowledged drinking five or six drinks that day, along with video showing him failing sobriety tests.
Nonetheless, the challenge lies in proving the specifics of intoxication that are essential for certain charges. Vecchio argued that if intoxication can’t be established, proving aggravated manslaughter becomes difficult.
Despite this, juries typically have a strong reaction to cases involving drunk drivers. Interestingly, Vecchio mentioned that not presenting Higgins’ borderline BAC results could work against him, possibly leading jurors to assume a higher level of intoxication based on witness accounts and other evidence.
Mestern elaborated that Higgins’ failure to stop after the incident reflects a disregard for human life, which can be used to argue the severity of his actions.
Previous attempts by Higgins to have the case dismissed based on the intoxication of the Gaudreau brothers have failed. Prosecutors maintain that Higgins hit the brothers after overtaking a vehicle that had slowed for them.
Higgins is set to appear in court on May 11 to discuss the motion to dismiss the charges. Neither his attorney nor the prosecutor’s office has provided comments regarding the case.
