California Tesla crash trial now becomes a Man vs Machine trial

In a first-of-its-kind test for the legal liability of a human driver in a car that was partially driving itself, a manslaughter trial for a deadly incident caused by a Tesla operating on Autopilot will start in Los Angeles, according to legal experts. The trial, which is scheduled to start on November 15, coincides with civil claims involving incidents employing Tesla's Autopilot that will go to trial next year and raises questions about a system that Tesla co-founder Elon Musk has hailed as the first step toward completely autonomous driving. Tesla's claims and Autopilot, according to critics, have made drivers less vigilant, which has increased the risk of accidents and fatalities. When it comes to Tesla's self-driving promises, the U.S. Department of Justice is looking into whether it may be held criminally liable. The Los Angeles trial, according to Legal Exports, may influence how the general public and future juries view Tesla and may serve as a test case for whether or not legal standards have kept pace with technological advancement. After midnight on December 29, 2019, Kevin George Aziz Riad, now 28 years old, was driving a Tesla Model S when he exited a freeway in Gardena, California, ran a red light, and collided with a Honda Civic, according to authorities. Gilberto Lopez and Maria Guadalupe Nieves-Lopez, the Civic's driver and passenger, died at the site. According to family members, they were out on their first date. At the time of the collision, the vehicle's Autopilot function, which can regulate speed, braking, and steering, was activated. In this case, Tesla is not charged, and legal experts claim that it would be difficult to bring a criminal prosecution against a corporation. According to Tesla's website, its driver assistance features do not render the vehicle driverless and instead call for active driver monitoring. The trial for the lawsuit brought by Gilberto Lopez's family against Tesla is set for July. Although the Tesla system, Autopilot, and Tesla spokespeople all encourage drivers to be less vigilant, I can't argue that the driver was not at fault, says Donald Slavik, a lawyer whose company is defending Lopez's family in a lawsuit against Tesla. Tesla, according to Slavik, understood the system's hazards but didn't sufficiently control them. Tesla is aware that users will employ Autopilot and do so in perilous circumstances. In September, Musk stated that he thought Tesla had a "moral obligation" to release its so-called "Full Self Driving" software, even if it was not perfect and Tesla was sued because doing so might save lives. According to the prosecution, Riad was careless in his speeding and lack of braking. Riad shouldn't be charged with a crime, according to his attorney Arthur Barens, who stated this in May. The Justice Department's (DOJ) investigation of Tesla's assertions, according to Robert Blecker, a criminal law expert at the New York Law School, may make it more difficult for California prosecutors to prove their cases in court. Blecker claims that the DOJ investigation aids him in making his allegation that "I relied on their advertising." I was therefore unaware of the hazards there. As it prepares to defend itself in pending litigation, Tesla runs the risk of having its reputation altered by legal and regulatory scrutiny, according to Bryant Walker Smith, a law professor at the University of South Carolina and expert on emerging transportation technologies. The image of Tesla may switch from one of a cutting-edge tech company doing exciting things to that of a struggling business. That is the danger, and in the civil action, the narrative is crucial because both parties tell a story to the jury.