Tesla prevails in first Autopilot wrongful-death suit
A jury has found Tesla not at fault in a lawsuit over a 2019 wrongful death which alleged that Autopilot caused a crash, killing one passenger and seriously injuring two.
In question was the death of 37-year-old Micah Lee, who was driving a Model 3 in 2019 in Menifee, CA (in the Inland Empire to the east of Los Angeles), and hit a palm tree at approximately 65 miles per hour, causing his death and the injury of two passengers, including an 8-year-old boy. The lawsuit was brought by the passengers.
The lawsuit alleged that Tesla knowingly marketed unsafe experimental software to the public, and that safety defects within the system led to the crash (in particular, a specific steering issue that was known by Tesla). Tesla responded that the driver had consumed alcohol (the driver’s blood alcohol level was at .05%, below California’s .08% legal limit) and that the driver is still responsible for driving when Autopilot is turned on.
A survivor in the vehicle at the time of the accident claimed that Autopilot was turned on at the time of the crash.
Tesla disputed this, saying it was unclear whether Autopilot was turned on – a difference from its typical modus operandi, which involves pulling vehicle logs and stating definitively whether and when Autopilot was on or off. Though these claims have sometimes been lodged when Autopilot was disengaged moments before a crash, when avoidance was no longer possible for the driver.
After four days of deliberations, the jury decided in Tesla’s favor, with a 9-3 decision that Tesla was not culpable.
While Tesla has won an autopilot injury lawsuit before, in April of this year, this is the first resolved lawsuit that has involved a death. That last lawsuit used the same reasoning – that drivers are still responsible for what happens behind the wheel while Autopilot or Full Self-Driving are engaged (despite the name of the latter system suggesting otherwise). Full Self-Driving was not publicly available at the time of Lee’s crash, though he had purchased the system for $6,000 expecting it to be available in the future.
Both of Tesla’s autonomous systems are “level 2” on the SAE’s driving automation scale, like most other new autonomous driving systems on the market these days. Although Autopilot is intended for highway use, Tesla’s FSD system can be activated in more situations than most cars. But there is no point at which the car assumed responsibility for driving – that responsibility always lies with the driver.
Since the trial began last month, Tesla CEO Elon Musk made a notable comment during his disastrous presence on Tesla’s Q3 conference call. He was asked whether and when Tesla would accept legal liability for autonomous drive systems, as Mercedes has just started doing with its Level 3 DRIVE PILOT system, the first of its kind in the US (read about our test drive of it in LA). Musk responded saying:
Well, there’s a lot of people that assume we have legal liability judging by the lawsuits. We’re certainly not being let that off the hook on that front, whether we’d like to or wouldn’t like to.
Elon Musk, CEO, Tesla
Later in the answer, Musk called Tesla’s AI systems “baby AGI.” AGI is an acronym for “artificial general intelligence,” which is a theorized technology for when computers become good enough at all tasks to be able to replace a human in basically any situation, not just in specialized situations. In short, it’s not what Tesla has and has nothing to do with the question.
Tesla is indeed currently facing several lawsuits over injuries and deaths that have happened in its vehicles, many alleging that Autopilot or FSD are responsible. In one, Tesla tried to argue in court that Musk’s recorded statements on self-driving “might have been deep fakes.”
We also learned recently, at the release of Musk’s biography, that he wanted to use Tesla’s in-car camera to spy on drivers and win autopilot lawsuits. Though that was apparently not necessary in this case.
Electrek’s Take
Questions like the one asked in this trial are interesting and difficult to answer, because they combine the concepts of legal liability, versus marketing materials, versus public perception.
Tesla is quite clear in official communications, like in operating manuals, in the car’s software itself, and so on, that drivers are still responsible for the vehicle when using Autopilot. Drivers accept agreements as such when first turning on the system.
Or at least, I think they do, since the first time I accepted it was so long ago. And that is the rub. People are also used to accepting long agreements whenever they turn on any system or use any piece of technology, and nobody reads those. Sometimes, these terms even include legally unenforceable provisions, depending on the venue in question.
And then, in terms of public perception, marketing, and in how Tesla has deliberately named the system, there is a view that Tesla’s cars really can drive themselves. Here’s Tesla explicitly saying “the car is driving itself” in 2016.
We here at Electrek, and our readership, know the difference between all of these concepts. We know that “Full Self-Driving” was (supposedly) named that way so that people can buy it ahead of time and eventually get access to the system when it finally reaches full self-driving capability (which should happen, uh, “next year”… in any given year). We know that “Autopilot” is meant to be a reference to how it works in airplanes, where a pilot is still required in the seat to take care of tasks other than cruising steadily. We know that Tesla only has a level 2 system, and that drivers still accept legal responsibility.
But when the general public gets a hold of technology, they tend to do things that you didn’t expect. That’s why caution is generally favorable when releasing experimental things to the public (and, early on, Tesla used to do this – giving early access to new Autopilot/FSD features to trusted beta testers, before wide release).
Despite being told before activating the software, and reminded often while the software is on, that the driver must keep their hands on the wheel, we all know that drivers don’t do that. That drivers pay less attention when the system is activated than when it isn’t. Studies have shown this, as well.
And so, while the jury found (probably correctly) that Tesla is not liable here, and while this is perhaps a good reminder to all Tesla drivers to keep paying attention to the road while you have Autopilot/FSD on, you are still driving, so act like it, we still think there is room for discussion about Tesla doing a better job of ensuring attention (for example, it just rolled out a driver attention monitoring feature using the cabin camera, six years after it started including those cameras in the Model 3).
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
We’ve heard it before, that Elon Musk doesn’t want Tesla to ever make an electric motorcycle. But the polarizing CEO has taken to social media to explain why he still says it will never happen.
As Musk confirmed, the issue isn’t that he doesn’t think Tesla could build an electric motorcycle, but rather that he doesn’t think they are safe to begin with.
He replied, “Never happening, as we can’t make motorcycles safe,” in response to an AI video about a fake Tesla motorcycle uploaded to his X platform (formerly Twitter).
Musk then referenced a previous story he has told several times about how he was nearly killed by a truck while riding a motorcycle in his youth.
Though he seemed to direct his feelings more towards street motorcycles. “Dirt bikes are safe if you ride carefully,” continued Musk, “as you can’t be smashed by a truck.”
Tesla’s own Autopilot features have long been criticized for their danger to motorcyclists, with several high-profile deaths caused by Tesla vehicles striking motorcycles while operating under Autopilot. Many have suggested that the company’s vision-focused self-driving setup confuses the more narrowly spaced paired tail lights on the back of cruiser motorcycles for a car farther in the distance, potentially explaining why Teslas have repeatedly rear-ended motorcyclists, with fatal results.
The electric motorcycle industry may not get a Tesla halo anytime soon, but it’s hardly standing still. Legacy brands like Honda, BMW, and Kawasaki are finally rolling out real production models, while companies such as Zero and LiveWire continue pushing the segment forward with higher performance and growing dealer support. Smaller companies like Ryvid have jumped to meet the demand for affordable commuter-focused motorcycles, while Asia’s giants such as Yadea and NIU are flooding the market with affordable scooters, driving global adoption far faster than in the US.
It appears that even without Tesla, electric motorcycling is expanding rapidly, innovating quickly, and attracting more riders every year.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Climate XChange’s Annual EV Raffle is back for the 10th year running – and for the first time ever, Climate XChange has two raffle options on the table! The nonprofit has helped lucky winners custom-order their ideal EVs for the past decade. Now you have the chance to kick off your holiday season with a brand new EV for as little as $100.
About half of the raffle tickets have been sold so far for each of the raffles – you can see the live ticket count on Climate XChange’s homepage – so your odds of winning are better than ever.
But don’t wait – raffle ticket sales end on December 8!
Climate XChange is working hard to help states transition to a zero-emissions economy. Every ticket you buy supports this mission while giving you a chance to drive home your dream EV.
Here’s how Climate XChange’s 10th Annual Raffle works:
The Luxury Raffle
- Grand Prize: The winner can choose any EV on the market, fully customized up to $120,000. This year, you can split the prize between two EVs if the total is $120,000 or less.
- Taxes covered: This raffle comes with no strings – Climate XChange also pays all of the taxes.
- Runner-up prizes: Even if you don’t win the Grand Prize, you still have a chance at the 2nd prize of $12,500 and the 3rd prize of $7,500.
- Ticket price: $250.
- Grand Prize Drawing: December 12, 2025.
- Only 5,000 tickets will be sold for the Luxury Raffle.
The Mini Raffle (New for 2025)
- Grand Prize: Choose any EV on the market, fully customized, up to $45,000. This is the perfect raffle if you’re ready to make the switch to an EV but aren’t in the market for a luxury model.
- Taxes covered: Climate XChange pays all the taxes on the Mini Raffle, too.
- Ticket price: $100.
- Only 3,500 tickets will be sold for the Mini Raffle.
Why it’s worth entering
For a decade, Climate XChange has run a raffle that’s fair, transparent, and exciting. Every ticket stub is printed, and the entire drawing is live-streamed, including the loading of the raffle drum. Independent auditors also oversee the process.
Plus, your odds on the Luxury and Mini Raffles are far better than most car raffles, and they’re even better if you enter both.
Remember that only 5,000 tickets will be sold for the Luxury Raffle and only 3,500 for the Mini Raffle, and around half of the available tickets have been sold so far, so don’t miss your shot at your dream EV!
Climate XChange personally works with the winners to help them build and order their dream EVs. The winner of the Ninth Annual EV Raffle built a gorgeous storm blue Rivian R1T.
How to enter
Go to CarbonRaffle.org/Electrek before December 8 to buy your ticket. Start dreaming up your perfect EV – and know that no matter what, you’re helping accelerate the shift to clean energy.
Who is Climate XChange?
Climate XChange (CXC) is a nonpartisan nonprofit working to help states pass effective, equitable climate policies because they’re critical in accelerating the transition to a zero-emissions economy. CXC advances state climate policy through its State Climate Policy Network (SCPN) – a community of more than 15,000 advocates and policymakers – and its State Climate Policy Dashboard, a leading data platform for tracking climate action across the US.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The CSC Monterey – one of the most charming little electric scooters on the US market – has dropped to a shockingly low $1,699, down from its original $2,899 MSRP. That’s nearly half off for a full-size, street-legal electric scooter that channels major Honda Super Cub energy, but without the gas, noise, or maintenance of the original.
CSC Motorcycles, based in Azusa, California, has a long history of importing and supporting small-format electric and gas bikes, but the Monterey has always stood out as the brand’s “fun vibes first” model. With its step-through frame, big retro headlight, slim bodywork, and upright seating position, it looks like something from a 1960s postcard – just brought into the modern era with lithium batteries and a brushless hub motor.
I had my first experience on one of these scooters back in 2021, when I reviewed the then-new model here on Electrek. I instantly fell in love with it and even got one for my dad. It now lives at his place and I think he gets just as much joy from looking at it in his garage as riding it.
You can see my review video below.
The performance is solidly moped-class, which is exactly what it’s designed for. A 2,400W rear hub motor pushes the Monterey up to a claimed 30 mph or 48 km/h (I found it really topped out at closer to 32 mph or 51 km/h), making it perfect for city streets, beach towns, and lower-speed suburban routes.
A 60V, roughly 1.6 kWh removable battery offers around 30–40 miles (48-64 km) of real-world range, depending on how aggressively you twist the throttle. It’s commuter-ready, grocery-run-ready, and campus-ready right out of the crate.
It’s also remarkably approachable. At around 181 pounds (82 kg), the Monterey is light for a sit-down scooter, making it easy to maneuver and park. There’s a small storage cubby, LED lighting, and the usual simple twist-and-go operation. And it comes with full support from CSC, a company that keeps a massive warehouse stocked with components and spare parts.
My sister has a CSC SG250 (I’m still trying to convert her to electric) and has gotten great support from them in the past, including from their mechanics walking her through carburetor questions over the phone. So I know from personal experience that CSC is a great company that stands behind its bikes.
But the real story here is the price. Scooters in this class typically hover between $2,500 and $4,500, and electric retro-style models often jump well above that.
At $1,699, the Monterey is one of the least expensive street-legal electric scooters available from a reputable US distributor, especially one that actually stocks parts and provides phone support.
If you’ve been curious about swapping a few car errands for something electric – or you just want a fun, vintage-styled runabout for getting around town – this is one of the best deals of the year.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024