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
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
