Connect with us
Tesla's Autopilot was not engaged in a crash with a train; driver unharmed Tesla's Autopilot was not engaged in a crash with a train; driver unharmed

News

Tesla argues human error caused fatal 2019 crash, not Autopilot: report

Credit: Jeremy from Sydney, Australia, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Published

on

Tesla now faces the jury’s verdict in a trial alleging that Autopilot caused a fatality, and the trial is expected to set a precedent for future cases surrounding advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). During closing arguments on Tuesday, an attorney for the plaintiffs pointed to an analysis Tesla conducted two years before the accident, claiming that the automaker knowingly sold the Model 3 with a safety issue related to its steering.

The trial began in California late last month after a 2019 incident in which 37-year-old Micah Lee veered off a highway outside Los Angeles at 65 miles per hour, suddenly striking a palm tree before the vehicle burst into flames. According to court documents, the crash killed Lee and injured both of his passengers, one of whom was an 8-year-old boy.

Lee’s passengers and estate initiated a civil lawsuit against Tesla, alleging that the company knew that Autopilot and its other safety systems were defective when it sold the Model 3.

Tesla has denied any liability in the accident, claiming that Lee had consumed alcohol before getting behind the wheel and saying it could not detect if Autopilot was engaged at the time of the crash.

Advertisement

This and other trials come as regulatory requirements for ADAS suites are just emerging, and the cases are expected to help navigate future court cases related to accidents with the systems.

According to Reuters, the attorney for the plaintiffs, Jonathan Michaels, showed the jury an internal safety analysis from Tesla in 2017 during closing arguments, in which employees identified “incorrect steering command” as a potential safety issue. Michaels said the issue involved an “excessive” steering wheel angle, arguing that Tesla was aware of related safety problems before selling the Model 3.

“They predicted this was going to happen. They knew about it. They named it,” Michaels said.

Michaels also said that Tesla created a specific protocol to deal with affected customers and that the company instructed workers to avoid accepting liability for the issue. Michaels also echoed prior arguments, saying that Tesla knew it was releasing Autopilot in an experimental state, though it needed to do so to boost market share.

Advertisement

“They had no regard for the loss of life,” Michaels added.

Michael Carey, Tesla’s attorney, said that the 2017 analysis wasn’t meant to identify the defect but instead was meant to help avoid any potential safety issues that could theoretically occur. Carey also said that Tesla developed a system to prevent Autopilot from making the same turn that had caused the crash.

Carey said that the subsequent development of the safety system “is a brick wall standing in the way of plaintiffs’ claim,” adding that there haven’t been any other cases where a Tesla has maneuvered the way that Lee’s did.

Instead, Carey argued to the jury that the crash’s simplest explanation was human error, asking jurors to avoid awarding damages on behalf of the severe injuries encountered by the victims.

Advertisement

“Empathy is a real thing, we’re not saying its not,” Carey argued. “But it does not make cars defective.”

Earlier this month, a federal judge in California ruled in Tesla’s favor in a similar case looking at whether the automaker misled consumers about its Autopilot system’s capabilities. In that case, which had the chance to become a class-action lawsuit, the judge ruled that most of the involved plaintiffs had signed an arbitration clause when purchasing the vehicle, requiring the claims to be settled outside of court.

The cases are expected to set precedents in court for future trials involving Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) beta systems and the degree of the automaker’s responsibility in accidents related to their engagement. Tesla is also facing additional information requests from the U.S. Department of Justice related to its Autopilot and FSD beta.

Tesla has received more requests regarding Autopilot and FSD from DOJ

Advertisement

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.

Zach is a renewable energy reporter who has been covering electric vehicles since 2020. He grew up in Fremont, California, and he currently lives in Colorado. His work has appeared in the Chicago Tribune, KRON4 San Francisco, FOX31 Denver, InsideEVs, CleanTechnica, and many other publications. When he isn't covering Tesla or other EV companies, you can find him writing and performing music, drinking a good cup of coffee, or hanging out with his cats, Banks and Freddie. Reach out at zach@teslarati.com, find him on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving expansion in Europe continues with new addition

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Full Self-Driving (Supervised) has taken yet another significant step forward in Europe. On May 29, Estonia became the third European Union country to approve the advanced driver-assistance technology, following approvals in the Netherlands and Lithuania.

Tesla Europe announced the news on X, confirming the expansion has continued across the continent that, at one time, seemed to be taking its sweet old time giving any approval to the FSD suite.

Advertisement

Estonia’s Transport Administration (Transpordiamet) granted the approval by recognizing the type certification issued by the Dutch vehicle authority RDW. This mutual recognition mechanism, enabled by EU regulations, allows other member states to fast-track deployment without repeating extensive local testing.

The Estonian authority noted that Tesla’s FSD had undergone rigorous evaluation on European roads for approximately 18 months before the initial Dutch approval in April 2026.

FSD Supervised remains classified as a Level 2 advanced driver-assistance system (ADAS). Drivers must maintain full attention, keep their hands on the wheel, and stay ready to intervene at any moment.

The system assists with tasks such as automatic lane changes, navigation through city streets, and responding to traffic objects, but it does not constitute full autonomy. Estonian officials emphasized this distinction, underscoring that safety responsibility lies entirely with the driver.

Advertisement

The rapid progression across the Baltic region highlights Tesla’s strategic approach to European expansion. The Netherlands provided the foundational type approval in April, unlocking doors for neighboring countries.

Lithuania followed swiftly in mid-May, with rollout beginning shortly thereafter. Estonia’s decision, coming just days later, demonstrates how smaller, digitally progressive nations are accelerating adoption.

Tesla owners in Estonia can expect an over-the-air software update in the coming weeks, bringing the latest FSD capabilities to compatible vehicles

This expansion builds on Tesla’s global momentum. FSD Supervised is now available in 11 countries worldwide, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and South Korea. In Europe, the approvals signal growing regulatory confidence in Tesla’s vision-based AI approach, which relies on cameras and neural networks rather than lidar or radar-heavy alternatives used by some competitors.

Advertisement

For Tesla, these European milestones are more than symbolic. They validate years of data collection and software iteration while opening new revenue streams through FSD subscriptions and purchases.

As the company continues refining its AI models with real-world miles from diverse driving environments, including Estonia’s variable winter conditions, the dataset grows richer, potentially benefiting global users.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk strikes down reports on SpaceX IPO rumors

Published

on

Credit: Grok

Elon Musk has firmly denied recent media reports suggesting that SpaceX has reduced its target valuation for an upcoming initial public offering.

The denial came directly from the SpaceX and Tesla frontman on his social media platform X, where he responded with a single word, “False,” to a post from ZeroHedge that cited Bloomberg sources.

This swift rebuttal underscores Musk’s ongoing effort to manage speculation surrounding one of the most anticipated market debuts in recent history.

According to the disputed reports, SpaceX had lowered its IPO valuation goal to at least $1.8 trillion from previous ambitions exceeding $2 trillion.

The claims emerged amid growing anticipation for the company’s confidential S-1 filing, which positions it for a potential public listing as early as June.

Some had pointed to strong revenue growth, particularly from the Starlink satellite internet service, which contributed heavily to the firm’s 2025 figures of $18.7 billion. Yet challenges persist in other areas, including substantial investments and losses tied to ambitious projects like Starship development and artificial intelligence initiatives, which plan to make life multiplanetary eventually.

Advertisement

Musk’s response highlights a pattern in which he actively counters what he views as inaccurate portrayals of his companies’ trajectories.

SpaceX, already valued privately at extraordinary levels, stands as a cornerstone of Musk’s empire alongside Tesla and xAI. The entrepreneur has long emphasized the transformative potential of reusable rockets and global broadband access, factors that fuel investor enthusiasm despite operational hurdles.

By rejecting the valuation downgrade narrative, Musk signals confidence in SpaceX’s fundamentals and its readiness for public markets on terms favorable to its long-term vision. People have been waiting a very long time to invest in SpaceX, and the valuation, as well as the introductory share price, is not going to need adjusting.

They’ll have plenty of suitors.

Advertisement

SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for

This episode reflects broader dynamics in the technology sector, where rumors often swirl around high-profile entities. Musk’s direct engagement with media narratives serves to maintain transparency and control the narrative around his ventures.

As SpaceX prepares for greater scrutiny in public markets, the founder’s denial reinforces optimism about its prospects. Supporters argue that the company’s innovative edge positions it for enduring success, far beyond short-term valuation debates. With the denial now public, attention turns to forthcoming regulatory filings that could provide clearer insights into SpaceX’s strategy and financial health.

The coming weeks promise to reveal more about how SpaceX will transition into a publicly traded powerhouse.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s dreams of operating a fully autonomous ride-hailing platform just took a massive step toward reality, as two separate events have indicated the company is perhaps closer than ever to achieving self-driving as a product.

On Thursday, Tesla was granted authorization by the State of Texas to operate driverless vehicles in a commercial manner. On May 28, Senate Bill 2807, passed by the 89th Texas Legislature, took effect after being passed back on September 1, 2025.

The bill establishes a statewide regulatory framework requiring authorization from the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles for companies to operate automated vehicles commercially on Texas roads.

This covers driverless, or SAE Level 4+, operations for passenger transport, meaning Robotaxi, or freight.

Advertisement

Tesla and other companies can self-certify their vehicles and tech as long as they:

  • Operate in compliance with Texas traffic laws
  • Maintain proper registration, title, and insurance
  • Use compliant automated driving systems
  • Record onboard activity and handle system failures and glitches safely.

The new authorization, which was first reported by James Stephenson on X, allows companies to utilize their own processes to determine if their vehicles are ready to operate without drivers.

It is a rule that expedites the entire approval process, keeping agencies out of a usually long, lengthy, and frustrating task that is essential to technological advancements. It essentially means Tesla can launch commercial Robotaxi operations at this point.

Advertisement

On the very same day, Tesla continued the momentum as CEO Elon Musk shared a video of Cybercab units autonomously driving off the property at Gigafactory Texas. This is a major step in the story of the Cybercab.

Mass production of the Cybercab started at Giga Texas in April, and it is already heading out of the factory on its own.

Advertisement

These two major events mark a drastic step forward in Tesla’s progress toward Cybercab and the permissions it needs to operate a self-driving ride-hailing service. Tesla is now able to operate autonomously under Texas law by self-certifying, and with the potentially imminent rollout of Cybercab, Tesla’s autonomous dreams are starting to take serious shape.

Continue Reading