• NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      The jury didn’t like it, but it didn’t really prove anything that wasn’t already known. I’m not really sure why they did what they did in the end? It wasn’t disputed that AP was on, and that the guy overrode the saftey systems. The jury found them partially at fault because they allowed the system to operate there and because they claim it didn’t work as advertised, and it was a huge jury verdict damages they have to pay.

      I have a feeling it’s going to get a reduced damages though as it goes through appeals. The dude was looking down for a phone he fumbled with his foot on the accelerator which overrides the safety systems, to the point the car warns you on screen that it will not brake while your foot is on the accelerator. And guess what… the car did not brake! Surprise!

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Oh, that might have been plain old incompetence rather than deliberate evidence tampering if both sides agreed to the bits that incriminate their own side. Unless there was something more going on that the logs would have shown, like “damage detected while self-driving enabled, dispatching Tesla cleanup crew to take care of the witnesses”.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          It was definitely deliberate. Something happened for some reason.

          Maybe they were worried about something bad being in there before they knew the facts were agreed upon, and then they had already dug their own grave?