The automotive industry probably recently received the verdict rendered on Friday 1is August, by an American court which judged the manufacturer Tesla partially responsible for a fatal accident, which occurred in April 2019, having involved one of its vehicles with the Autopilot option, its driving assistance technology.
The Austin group (Texas), which said it was appealing, is liable for some 242 million dollars (nearly 210 million euros), said Darren Jeffrey Rousso, from the Rousso Boumel, who represented the beneficiaries.
In this case was the share of responsibility, during accidents, to manufacturers – who are increasingly developing driving autonomy – and imprudent drivers who rest on the aid system.
The eight members of a popular jury decided on Friday at the end of a trial before a federal civil court in Miami (Florida), to allocate the complainants total compensation of $ 328 million. Rousso explained that the jury had set Tesla damage to $ 200 million. The jurors also allocated $ 59 million to the beneficiaries of Naibel Benavids Leon – killed in the accident – and 69 million to his boyfriend Dillon Angulo – who was injured – under the damage to endured suffering. Two thirds of this sum are the responsibility of the author of the disaster and a third party returns to Tesla.
Full of speed
According to the complaint against Tesla, the Chevrolet SUV in which the couple was stopped on April 25, 2019 in Key Largo, Florida, was struck at full speed by a Model S, failing to have been spotted by the Autopilot driving aid device. The young woman, aged 22 at the time of her death, was propelled over several tens of meters, continues the complaint. Dillon Angulo has suffered from fractures and a head trauma.
“Today’s verdict is an error and only causes automobile security back, and threatens Tesla and industry’s efforts [automobile] as a whole to design and implement a technology that saves lives ”reacted the American manufacturer.
Le jury “Concluded that the driver was very largely responsible for the tragic accident” But, continues Tesla, the elements of the file “Proved that this driver was solely responsible because he was driving in speeding, with the foot on the accelerator – which deactivated Autopilot – while he was trying to recover the phone he had dropped and without having his eyes on the road”.
The main lawyer of the complainants, Brett Schreiber, acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, had been neglected when he has toasted flashing lights, a stop panel and an intersection at 100 km/hour before hitting the vehicle, parked, in which the couple was. But he estimated that Tesla was at fault because her system let the driver act recklessly and authorized her to take secondary roads for which he is not designed.
“I had too much confidence in technology”
According to Schreiber, Tesla’s decision to use the term autopilot misleads people and puts their lives in danger because the system only helps drivers changing tracks, slowing down the vehicle and performing other tasks, far from driving the vehicle itself. He supported his remarks by specifying that other car brands use terms such as “driver assistance” and “co -pilot” to ensure that drivers do not depend on the system excessively.
The memorable world
Test your general culture with the writing of the “world”
Test your general culture with the writing of the “world”
Discover
“I had too much confidence in technology”said George McGee during his testimony. “I thought that if the car saw something in front of it, it would make a warning and brake”he explained.
Tesla’s main lawyer Joel Smith explained that the vehicle notified drivers to keep your eyes on the road and hands on the steering wheel, but that George McGee had chosen not to do it by looking for a mobile phone who fell into the cabin. Mr. Smith concluded that the accident was the sole responsibility of the driver, noting that the latter had already crossed the same intersection of the tens of times in his life without having had an accident: “The cause [de l’accident] is he dropped his mobile phone. »»
“No car in 2019, and no currently, could have avoided the accident”hammered Tesla. “It is a fiction concocted by the complainants’ lawyers to blame the car when the driver – from the first day – recognized and accepted his responsibility”added the manufacturer.
During this complex trial, the complainants’ lawyers said Tesla had hidden or lost essential evidence, including data and videos recorded a few seconds before the accident. “We finally learned what had happened that night, that the car was in fact defective”said the victim’s sister.
The verdict relaunches the debate on the reliability of driving aid systems and the responsibility of manufacturers in the face of fatal accidents. Many similar cases against Tesla have been classified without follow -up and, when this was not the case, they were settled by the company to avoid being under the spotlight.
