The Snohomish man had set his car on Autopilot and was looking at his cellphone when he struck a motorcyclist on Highway 522 on Friday, court records show.

A 56-year-old Snohomish man had set his Tesla Model S on Autopilot and was looking at his cellphone on Friday when he struck and killed a motorcyclist in front of him in Monroe, court records show.

A Washington State Patrol trooper arrested the Tesla driver at the crash site on Highway 522 at Fales Road shortly before 4 p.m. on suspicion of vehicular manslaughter, according to a probable cause affidavit.

The motorcyclist, Jeffrey Nissen, 28, of Stanwood, died at the scene, records show.

The Tesla driver told a state trooper he was driving home from having lunch in Bothell and was looking at his phone when he heard a bang and felt his car lurch forward, accelerate and hit the motorcyclist, according to the affidavit.

The man told the trooper his Tesla got stuck on top of the motorcyclist and couldn’t be moved in time to save him, the affidavit states.

The trooper cited the driver’s “inattention to driving, while on autopilot mode, and the distraction of the cell phone while moving forward,” and trusting “the machine to drive for him” as probable cause for a charge of vehicular manslaughter, according to the affidavit.

The man was booked into the Snohomish County Jail and was released Sunday after posting bond on his $100,000 bail, jail records show.

  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    2 months ago

    this guy should get everything coming to him. FSD/autopilot is not good enough to take your hands off the wheel and not pay attention to the fuck’s going on around you.

    that said. Tesla absolutely should get a massive wrongful death lawsuit and get fucked by the courts.

    • machinin@lemmy.world
      1·
      2 months ago

      FSD/autopilot is not good enough to take your hands off the wheel and not pay attention to the fuck’s going on around you.

      What? There’s a video on Tesla’s website right now that says the driver is at the wheel only for legal reasons. There is no other purpose to have a driver.

      I’m stumped!

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        Yeah. how many times did they say ‘Cybertruck is coming out this year’, only for it to not? I suspect they got it into production by mashing parts together because of consumer protection things coming into effect. they’re full of shit. and the “legal reasons” are so as to make the driver responsible and not them.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      0·
      2 months ago

      I’m honestly not sure which is worse, that Tesla made a system they call Autopilot that isn’t an autopilot or that Tesla owners still think it is.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          0·
          2 months ago

          Yeah, but it was made clear years ago, even by Tesla themselves, that “autopilot” doesn’t actually mean “autopilot.” So maybe it’s 50/50?

          • Bonehead@kbin.social
            1·
            2 months ago

            They still sell it as “Autopilot and Full Self Driving”. Sure, they claim “Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Capability are intended for use with a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment”, but that’s buried in the marketing text that no one reads. It really should be called “Enhanced Lane Assist with Auto-Follow Cruise Control”, but that doesn’t sell as many cars.

            Edit: Warning…Lemmy or Kbin, I’m not sure which, is current buggy and showing my link as a video connected to RedGifs. Clicking the link actually brings you to the Tesla website. Don’t open the video…

            • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
              1·
              2 months ago

              No matter how they’re marketed and used, self-driving systems will make people less engaged (that’s the entire point, people don’t use it out of arm fatigue, they use it because it’s mentally relaxing!) and therefore more distracted.

              “The driver should keep their full attention on the road and be prepared to take over at any point” is an impossible standard and a lame-ass loophole that shouldn’t even be allowed to be cited in a court of law. Fully engaged drivers do not ask an “autopilot” to steer for them.

            • AA5B@lemmy.world
              01·
              2 months ago

              When I tried it out, after your hands are off the wheel for several seconds, the screen flashes blue then autopilot disengages and the car comes to a stop. Not excusing what it can and can’t do, but you can’t really drive hands free without intentionally working around very obvious restrictions. The driver can’t claim ignorance

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    0·
    2 months ago

    What’s the actual point of “autopilot” if you have to pay full attention and be ready to take control at a moments notice?

    Sounds like… driving. 🤔

    • Shrank7242@lemmy.zipEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      It’s poorly named. A more accurate, less marketing influenced name would be “Adaptive Cruise Control with Lane Assist” for the basic “Autopilot”.

      • jacksilver@lemmy.world
        1·
        2 months ago

        I think it’s more fair to say it is maliciously named. It’s false advertising and leading to issues exactly like the one mentioned in this post.