In a significant legal victory for Tesla, the automaker has won its first trial in the United States over allegations that its Autopilot driver-assistance system was responsible for a fatal crash. This verdict comes as Tesla faces multiple lawsuits and federal investigations related to its Autopilot technology.
The case was a civil lawsuit filed in Riverside County Superior Court, where it was alleged that the Autopilot system caused a Tesla Model 3 to suddenly veer off a highway, strike a palm tree, and burst into flames. Tragically, the 2019 crash resulted in the death of the Tesla owner, Micah Lee, and serious injuries to his two passengers, including an 8-year-old boy.
During the trial, Tesla argued that Lee had consumed alcohol before getting behind the wheel, and it was unclear whether Autopilot was engaged at the time of the crash. The 12-member jury ultimately found that the vehicle did not have a manufacturing defect. The verdict, delivered after four days of deliberations, came with a 9-3 vote.
While the outcome represents a victory for Tesla, it does not diminish the tragic nature of the accident or the pain and suffering experienced by the victims. The trial included gruesome testimony about the passengers’ injuries, and the plaintiffs had sought $400 million in damages, plus punitive damages.
Jonathan Michaels, an attorney for the plaintiffs, expressed disappointment in the verdict, suggesting that the prolonged deliberation indicates a shadow of uncertainty. However, Tesla maintained that its cars are well-designed and make the roads safer, and the jury’s conclusion was the right one, according to the company.
This victory marks the second significant win for Tesla in 2023 regarding Autopilot technology. In a similar case in Los Angeles in April, Tesla’s strategy emphasized that the company warns drivers that its technology requires human monitoring, despite the names “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving.” In that case, the jury also found that Tesla had taken adequate precautions, and driver distraction was a factor in the accident.
These verdicts highlight a key perspective in these cases: the ultimate responsibility for the vehicle’s operation remains with the driver. Despite the branding of “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving,” Tesla’s messaging emphasizes the need for human supervision.
The outcome of both trials suggests that juries continue to emphasize the presence of a human driver as the point at which responsibility lies, even in cases involving advanced driver-assistance systems.
However, it is important to note that the Riverside case had unique steering issues, distinguishing it from other lawsuits where plaintiffs have alleged defective design, leading to misuse of Autopilot. In the Riverside case, the jury was specifically tasked with evaluating whether a manufacturing defect impacted the steering.
Tesla continues to face scrutiny and investigations, both civil and criminal, related to its Autopilot system. The US Department of Justice is conducting a criminal probe, while the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating Autopilot’s performance following multiple crashes involving Tesla vehicles hitting stationary emergency vehicles.
While these legal victories provide Tesla with strong defenses in civil cases, some analysts believe that regulatory actions may be necessary to address safety concerns related to advanced driver-assistance systems.
In conclusion, Tesla’s recent victory in the first US trial involving a fatal crash and Autopilot technology underscores the complexity and challenges surrounding the integration of advanced driver-assistance systems into the driving landscape. While Tesla’s legal defenses have held up, the broader conversation about safety and regulation in the age of autonomous driving technologies continues to evolve.