News
Florida man charged after trying to hit Tesla protestors with car
Tesla protestors were nearly struck with the man’s car, though authorities say no one was injured.
A man in Florida has been charged with assault after attempting to drive into protestors outside of a Tesla store over the weekend, coming as the latest in ongoing protests and vandalism against CEO Elon Musk.
On Saturday, 44-year-old Andrew Tutil attempted to drive into protestors with his Nissan Pathfinder at the West Palm Beach Tesla store, although no one was injured, according to a report from Palm Beach Daily News. The store had around 150 protestors outside around 1:00 p.m., and Tutil reportedly drove slowly into the crowd before parking on the sidewalk and getting out.
“He drove into a crowd of senior citizens,” said Mark Offerman. “Everybody was able to move out, but two older women were really almost clipped. We immediately called the cops.”
After parking on the sidewalk where protestors had to jump out of the way, Tutil, a retired U.S. Army Captain, civil engineer, and supporter of Donald Trump, claimed that he was an employee of the Tesla store and that his brakes and electronics had malfunctioned, according to Offerman.
Palm Beach County records show that Tutil was later arrested and charged with first-degree felony aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without intent after police questioned Tutil and surrounding witnesses and reviewed photos and video footage.
The news comes as a wave of protests, acts of vandalism, and some violent encounters such as this one have been increasingly targeting Tesla stores in recent weeks against Musk and the Trump administration. Additionally, Musk’s work with Trump’s newly created “government efficiency” division has been a central theme in protests at Tesla stores, as federal workers have expressed criticism for the administration’s approach to “eliminating fraud and waste.”
🚨 President Trump on Tesla protests and vandalism:
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 11, 2025
READ MORE ON TESLA PROTESTS: I went to an anti-Musk protest at a Tesla store in Colorado—here’s what I experienced
The widespread protests began in January, after Musk performed what many said looked like a Nazi salute at Trump’s inauguration ceremony, and after he spoke at a campaign event for the far-right German party Alternative for Germany (AfD). During the rally, Musk said that there was “too much of a focus on past guilt and we need to move beyond that,” which many claimed was in reference to Nazi Germany.
The so-called “Tesla Takedown” movement launched over the past several weeks is targeting around 500 separate protests across 277 stores around the U.S. The Palm Beach protest on Saturday was just one of a handful in Florida alone, including those in Gainesville, Jacksonville, Merrit Island, and Sarasota, to name a few.
One protestor at a Tesla store in Colorado earlier this month told Teslarati that she was protesting Musk because she was “highly concerned that our Constitution is being ignored,” adding that “it’s dangerous to have power rest in a handful of ultra-wealthy people.”
Others at the event highlighted Musk and Trump’s attacks on queer, trans, and non-binary people, as well as the administration’s recent controversies with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and claims that the President is aligning with Russia President Vladimir Putin, as a few of the major reasons they were protesting at the Loveland Tesla store.
Musk has mostly deflected and made light of claims of his alignment with Nazis, while the public has been polarized on defending or condemning these and other actions.
The Tesla CEO was defended by Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said he was being “falsely smeared” immediately following the inauguration event. While the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) also went on to defend the action as an “awkward gesture,” the group has since condemned some of Musk’s more recent posts making light of genocide.
Earlier this month, Musk reposted then deleted a screenshot shared by X user Rothmus claiming that “Stalin, Mao and Hitler didn’t murder millions of people,” but that “their public sector workers did.”
“It is deeply disturbing and irresponsible for someone with a large public platform to elevate the kind of rhetoric that serves to undermine the seriousness of these issues,” the ADL wrote in a response on X.
Credit: Rothmus/Alice Smith (via Elon Musk repost on X)
In addition to what have largely appeared to be peaceful protests at Tesla stores, a number of acts of vandalism, including graffiti, arson, and some even more violent assaults involving weapons, have been targeting the automaker’s locations around the world.
Multiple people were taken into custody following repeated arson and graffiti at a Tesla store in Colorado within the past few weeks, while multiple Tesla vehicles have been set on fire at stores, and one Tesla store has been shot at. Owners of Tesla’s vehicles have also been targeted in public, with some being captured on Sentry Mode keying or tagging the vehicles.
The Trump administration has also started labeling such attacks against Tesla as “domestic terrorism,” and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has started investigating several of the events, including one involving two Cybertrucks that were set on fire in Seattle and another at a store in Oregon that was shot at twice in a few weeks.
Tesla’s Giga Berlin director responds to anti-Musk criticism
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s next Starship launch is about to attempt its biggest leap yet
SpaceX targets September 22 for Starship Flight 14, its first attempt to reach real orbit.
SpaceX has set September 22 as the target date for Starship’s 14th test flight, and this one carries a different goal than any of the 13 that came before it. Every previous Starship mission has intentionally flown a suborbital arc, reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launched. Flight 14 is designed to send the craft into a genuine orbit around Earth for the first time.
The launch window opens at 7:15 a.m. Central time at Starbase in South Texas and runs for 75 minutes, pending regulatory approval, according to SpaceX’s mission description published Tuesday. If the flight goes as planned, Starship will circle the planet roughly six times at an altitude near 275 kilometers over about ten hours before a deorbit burn sends it toward a splashdown in the Pacific Ocean west of Chile, a departure from the Indian Ocean recoveries used on the last several flights.
The mission also marks the first attempt to put a working batch of Starlink V3 satellites into actual service. Flight 13 carried 20 of the new satellites in July, but because that mission never left a suborbital trajectory, the payload reentered along with the ship instead of separating into orbit.
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
Each V3 satellite is rated for roughly one terabit per second of downlink capacity, so a successful deployment on Flight 14 would be SpaceX’s largest single jump in network bandwidth since Starlink began flying on Falcon 9.
Flight 13 still did the heavier lifting on the technical side. That July mission flew a deliberately more stressful reentry profile to test Starship’s heat shield, and the ship survived its softest splashdown yet, intact enough for drone inspections shortly after landing. Elon Musk said the flight delivered “all the heat shield data we needed and then some,” a result Teslarati covered in detail when he later said SpaceX had solved the vehicle’s biggest reusability challenge. Flight 14 is where SpaceX starts spending that confidence on an actual orbital insertion rather than another controlled fall back to Earth.
One thing Flight 14 will not attempt is a tower catch of the ship. Musk floated the idea right after Flight 13, but walked the timeline back in August, saying a catch attempt was more likely “in a few months.” The Super Heavy booster will still aim for its own recovery, targeting an offshore landing point in the Gulf of America, the same approach used on recent flights.
September 22 is SpaceX’s own target, not a locked date. Starship’s schedule has slipped before over hardware readiness and FAA sign off, and the company has said as much in its own mission notes. But the plan itself represents the clearest marker yet that Starship is moving from a suborbital test program into something meant to carry paying payloads and, eventually, people.
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’
