Tesla wins first U.S. Autopilot trial involving fatal crash::Tesla won the first U.S. trial over allegations that its Autopilot driver assistant feature led to a death, a major victory as it faces several other lawsuits.
The highlights:
"The case that concluded on Tuesday, in a California state court, was filed by two passengers in a 2019 crash who accused the company of knowing Autopilot was defective when it sold the car. Tesla argued human error caused the crash.
The 12-member jury announced they found the vehicle did not have a manufacturing defect. The verdict came on the fourth day of deliberations, and the vote was 9-3.
The civil lawsuit filed in Riverside County Superior Court alleged the Autopilot system caused owner Micah Lee’s Model 3 to suddenly veer off a highway east of Los Angeles at 65 miles per hour (105 km per hour), strike a palm tree and burst into flames, all in the span of seconds.
The 2019 crash killed Lee and seriously injured his two passengers, including a then-8-year-old boy who was disemboweled, court documents show. The trial involved gruesome testimony about the passengers’ injuries, and the plaintiffs asked the jury for $400 million plus punitive damages.
Tesla denied liability, saying Lee consumed alcohol before getting behind the wheel. The electric-vehicle maker also argued it was unclear whether Autopilot was engaged at the time of the crash.
In [other Tesla autopilot] lawsuits, plaintiffs allege Autopilot is defectively designed, leading drivers to misuse the system. The jury in Riverside, however, was only asked to evaluate whether a manufacturing defect impacted the steering."
deleted by creator
One source says his BAC was 0.05%. California’s legal limit is 0.08%. That doesn’t exclude it from being a factor, just pointing out the guy wasn’t blitzed out of his mind or anything.
The part about being unclear if AP was engaged is quite suspect though, given they have been able to definitively say in other crashes whether it was on or off and even if it had been disengaged moments prior to the accident.
Pure speculation, but I’m guessing the wreck + vehicle fire may have destroyed any computers/logs.
Assuming that there’s an actual valid reason that it’s unclear whether the vehicle was in autopilot or not.
I would hope that for a new piece of technology (EVs are still new imo) that they would find a robust way to keep track of any logs. If you make a car and the second it is in an accident all the logs disappear, then what’s the point? I’d consider that negligence.
Good human ❤️
-
Tesla will win the rest also. The only “defect” I can think of is if it failed to disengage when driver input was detected.
-
The passengers in the car died, so what makes the complainants think that it was even engaged or especially that it failed?
This just reeks of family members looking for an opportunity to exploit their loss for a payday.
Just remember your own anecdotal experience does not signify what is the truth. Your statement that Tesla will win the rest is very clearly biased.
As an example, I’ve never been hit by a car while cycling to work. Does that mean cycling to work is 100% safe? Clearly not, but from my viewpoint it is.
Just remember your own anecdotal experience does not signify what is the truth.
I don’t have any, nor did I refer to any anecdotal experience, nor would I if I had, so I’ve no idea what you’re on about.
Your statement that Tesla will win the rest is very clearly biased.
…based on what? My anecdotal experience? My statement is based on simple logic:
-
drivers are supposed to be attentive at all times so even if it failed, that’s the fault of the driver for not being attentive, unless, as I said, the system failed to disengage somehow.
-
There’s absolutely no way they could have known that it was on autopilot at the time.
-
Still a good thing to test shit in court, no?
…no? It’s a waste of the court’s time.
It’s what courts are for homie.
Courts are for investigating legitimate causes of harm, dawg.
And illegitimate ones. We can’t have all court cases be wins.
They don’t have to all be “wins” but people can have the sensibility to not file a case when they know the opposing party holds zero blame. That’s a waste of resources for all parties, including yours and mine.
-
Such a crap use of logic/words to try and escape culpability.
“We said the driver has to be 100% attentive! So if the car swerves suddenly and crashes it’s the drivers fault, they should have paid attention!” Jesus, if that’s honestly your defence then you have no understanding of the real world
Turns out that if you make tens of millions of cars and put them on the streets, some of them end up in accidents, and in some of these cases people die. Some people, usually with an agenda, see this as an evidence against said car manufacturer while the rest of us see no difference to pretty much every other car on the roads.
Why don’t we limit all cars to 30mph? That would greatly decrease the number of fatal accidents. Well the answer is: convenience. We’ve accepted the trade-off. No sane person is demanding a 100% safety rating because that’s impossible.
Removed by mod
