Uber not criminally liable in 2018 fatal self-driving crash: prosecutors

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - Arizona prosecutors said on Tuesday that Uber Technologies Inc is not criminally liable in a March 2018 crash in which one of the company’s self-driving cars struck and killed a pedestrian in Tempe.

The Yavapai County Attorney in a letter said there was “no basis” for criminal liability for Uber, but added that the conduct of the back-up driver, Rafael Vasquez, should be referred to the Tempe, Arizona police for additional investigation.

Police said last year that Vasquez was streaming a television show on her phone until about the time of a fatal crash and called the incident “entirely avoidable.” An Uber spokeswoman declined to comment.

The Maricopa County Attorney referred the case last year to another office because of a conflict. In the letter on Tuesday, Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Sullivan Polk said its investigation has concluded that “the collision video, as it displays, likely does not accurately depict the events that occurred.”

-snip-

BUSINESS NEWS MARCH 5, 2019 / 5:05 PM / UPDATED 12 MINUTES AGO
David Shepardson
2 MIN READ


Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-crash-autonomous/uber-not-criminally-liable-in-2018-fatal-self-driving-crash-prosecutors-idUSKCN1QM2O8

[Auggie]

1. Bullshit

Uber is at much at fault as Vasquez. This is still brand new technology. Uber should have had a supervisor in the car with Vasquez.

[LisaM]

2. The collision video does not accurately depict the events?

I watched that video about half a dozen times. The person was flat out not paying attention until it was too late and the car didn't stop itself at all.

[appalachiablue]

3. In several articles after the incident, I read that BOTH brake

systems were off- Uber's and the auto mfg. but no one told the driver. Why for the love of God?

[LisaM]

6. Why wouldn't the driver check?

It's all really sad.

[appalachiablue]

7. NO idea, she was watching 'The Voice' TV show on her cell ph.

And the terrain/roads are flat there for driving. The victim was a middle aged woman, crossing there on a bike which is normal. She was homeless too I think. So terrible, tragic and preventable.

>>Chandler, Arizona residents attack *Google's WAYMO self-driving test vans 2018-19.

[cstanleytech]

12. "crossing there on a bike which is normal." Now normal to cross outside of the crosswalk?

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/19/uber-self-driving-car-kills-woman-arizona-tempe

"Tempe police said the self-driving car was in autonomous mode at the time of the crash and that the vehicle hit a woman, who was walking outside of the crosswalk and later died at a hospital."

Don't get me wrong , I am not a supporter of self driving cars or drones for package delivery as I think the techs decades away from being truly reliable and secure but in this case if the women was crossing where she should not be then it is partly her own fault.

[appalachiablue]

16. Early reports after the accident covered this some- concensus was

Last edited Wed Mar 6, 2019, 01:24 AM - Edit history (2)

that it was not uncommon, or unusual for locals to travel over the crosswalk area. She wasn't outside it by much from what I saw.
The driver wasn't looking and the brake systems were deactivated, so even if the pedestrian was inside the crosswalk, it's almost certain that she still would have been hit by the driver. IMO the safety hazard and responsibility/neglect were due to the inattentive driver and lack of brakes. The traveling car couldn't stop, not even try as evidenced by the film. This never should have happened, human error plus Uber's mistakes. They must improve.
____________________
- Not Ready for Prime Time? 2 More Incidents -

John M Simpson, privacy and technology project director with Consumer Watchdog, said the collision highlighted the need for tighter regulations of the nascent technology. “The robot cars cannot accurately predict human behavior, and the real problem comes in the interaction between humans and the robot vehicles,” said Simpson, whose advocacy group called for a national moratorium on autonomous car testing in the wake of the deadly collision. Simpson said he was unaware of any previous fatal crashes involving an autonomous vehicle and a pedestrian.

1.**Tesla Motors was the first to disclose a death involving a self-driving car in 2016 when the sensors of a Model S driving in autopilot mode failed to detect a large white 18-wheel truck and trailer crossing the highway. The car drove full speed under the trailer, causing the collision that killed the 40-year-old behind the wheel in the Tesla.

Earlier this year, California regulators approved the testing of self-driving cars on public roads without human drivers monitoring inside. “The technology is not ready for it yet, and this just sadly proves it,” said Simpson.

2. **In one recent incident, California police officers found a Tesla that was stopped in the middle of a five-lane highway and found a driver asleep behind the wheel. The man said the vehicle was in “autopilot”, which is Tesla’s semi-autonomous driver assist system, and he was arrested on suspicion of drunk driving. (!!!!!!???? DRUNK DRIVER)

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/19/uber-self-driving-car-kills-woman-arizona-tempe

[LisaM]

17. I think the crosswalks were far apart.

It's one of those quandaries people not in vehicles face. In some place where I get off the bus the crosswalks.can be half a mile apart or more.

[cstanleytech]

10. Really depends on what the driver was told to do when using the vehicle wouldnt it? After all

if they were simply told "Get in and use this and it will essentially drive itself without your input." but not provided with a checklist of things to check regarding the autopilot and the braking system then its hardly their fault.

[Coventina]

11. The person is there because they are supposed to react if the car malfunctions.

Well, the car was malfunctioning, and she couldn't be bothered to stop watching her cell phone.

I hope she feels guilty to her grave.

[cstanleytech]

13. Yes but isn't it dependent on the training they were given and what they were told to look out for?

[Coventina]

14. If you are being paid to sit behind the wheel of a car you are responsible for what happens

when you are there.

The only exception would have been if the car had done something to prevent the driver from being able to stop.

In this case, the automatic break didn't work, and the person was too busy watching TV to apply the manual break.

Murder.

[cstanleytech]

15. "Murder." Maybe but doesnt it depend on if they were

told that part of their duty when using it was to to check to make sure the brake system was engaged and or atleast that it was disabled in the first place?

[Coventina]

18. So you think her instructions were to sit and watch TV?

Of course she was instructed to take any action needed to prevent killing people.

[groundloop]

4. Uber is stupid as hell for attempting this....

I have no doubt it could be safely done in a controlled environment (ALL cars under computer control, roads designed to communicate with the cars, etc.) but to try 'self driving' cars in the 'wild' is just crazy. HELL YES Uber should be held responsible. (They obviously didn't do a very good job selecting or training the back-up driver either).

[not fooled]

5. Hardly surprising

given that governor douchey had cut a secret deal with uber to allow them into the state to test their unproven technology, thereby turning unsuspecting AZ residents into unwitting crash test dummies.

Error-Zona: playground for corporate interests. Enter the state at your own risk.

[appalachiablue]

8. Right. This was preventable and tragic, Uber is responsible.

A female victim, and homeless. So tragic but the carnival goes on...

[2naSalit]

9. Well, they can anticipate further

attacks from the public against their vehicles then. I can see how that's going to continue unabated for some time to come.