“Total contempt of Elon Musk”: Tesla disputes a legal sanction of 243 million dollars, here are her arguments

We are in 2019, in Florida. George McGee is behind the wheel of his Tesla Model S which grits a stop and then strikes a SUV parked perpendicular to the road. Nebel Benavids Leon, 20, dies during the accident. His boyfriend Dillon Angulo is seriously injured. George McGee then used Tesla’s autopilot which nevertheless asked to keep her hands on the steering wheel. The man had tried to reach his smartphone when his electric vehicle caused this fatal accident.

Tesla refuses to pay $ 243 million

A third of the responsibility of the accident was awarded to Tesla by the jury. The automaker is therefore ordered to pay $ 243 million to the victims. The remaining two thirds of responsibility were charged to George McGee who has already settled his own dispute with families.

Except that Tesla refuses this verdict and even requests its outright cancellation. Otherwise, Elon Musk’s company requires a new trial. In a document deposited in the court, Tesla’s lawyers claim that this verdict goes against Florida’s civil liability law, the equitable procedure clause and common sense. The manufacturer believes that George McGee himself admitted that he was trying to catch his smartphone at the time of the drama. Tesla qualifies her conduct as“Extraordinary imprudence”.

The lawyers of Elon Musk’s company present their argument. According to them, the responsibility for products sanctions car manufacturers who offer cars “Dangerous contrary to the expectations of consumers, or” unreasonably uncommon “.

Tesla’s lawyers believe that “Here, this is not the case”. Tesla also estimates that this penalty of $ 243 million would create a dangerous precedent which “would discourage innovation, sows confusion in consumer expectations and would lead manufacturers to abandon safety improvements for fear of sanctions when a driver is misused from their products”.

Tesla lawyers do not stop there and even go so far as to attack the opposing party by accusing the advice of the victims of having “Overwhelmed this jury with a flow of prejudicial but not relevant evidence on data conservation, Elon Musk and unrelated accidents”.

The company writes: “The lawyers of the complainants made sure that this trial never really relates to the Tesla Model S of 2019 or to the accident caused by the reckless driving of McGee”.

The victims’ lawyer remains confident against Tesla

Brett Schreiber, main lawyer for the complainants, reacted by e-mail: “This request is the last example of the total contempt of Tesla and Musk for the human cost of their defective technology. The jury heard all the facts and has reached the right conclusion that it was a case of shared responsibility but this does not minimize the full role that the autopilot and the company’s false statements on its capacities played in the accident that killed Nebel and injured Dylan in a permanent way”.

Brett Schreiber remains confident: “We are convinced that the court will confirm this verdict which does not constitute an indictment of the industry of autonomous vehicles but of the development and the imprudent deployment and dangerous by Tesla of its autopilot system”.

Recall that a few months before this verdict, Tesla rejected an amicable settlement offer of $ 60 million proposed by the victims. The company preferred to go to trial, a bet that costs it today four times more with a difference of $ 183 million.

Numériques settles in Beaugrenelle Paris for The most tech days : product demonstrations, use or purchase advice, exchanges with our journalists … Discover the full program here.