Elon Musk’s Tesla on Trial in Miami Lawsuit \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ A rare jury trial began in Miami over Tesla’s Autopilot system, which plaintiffs allege contributed to a 2019 fatal crash involving a university student. The lawsuit claims the car failed to stop or warn the driver before the impact. Tesla blames the distracted driver, not its technology.
Quick Looks
- Jury trial begins in Miami over 2019 Tesla crash
- Lawsuit claims Autopilot failed to warn or stop vehicle
- University student Naibel Benavides was killed, boyfriend injured
- Tesla blames distracted driver reaching for cell phone
- Judge allows case to proceed with punitive damages
- Autopilot safety under scrutiny ahead of robotaxi launch
- Tesla denies liability, citing driver warnings in manuals
- Federal regulators previously recalled 2.3 million Teslas
- Autopilot and Full Self-Driving systems under federal investigation
- Trial outcome could affect Tesla’s future self-driving ambitions
Deep Look
A high-profile trial that could reshape public trust in Tesla’s self-driving ambitions began Monday in Miami, where a federal jury will decide whether the company bears any responsibility for a deadly 2019 crash involving its Autopilot system.
At the center of the case is Naibel Benavides Leon, a 22-year-old university student who was struck and killed near Key West, Florida, after a Tesla Model S, reportedly operating with Autopilot enabled, slammed into a parked vehicle at nearly 70 mph. The impact hurled Benavides 75 feet into a wooded area, and seriously injured her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo.
Plaintiffs Say Autopilot Failed to Intervene
According to the lawsuit, filed in 2021, the Tesla’s Autopilot driver-assistance system failed to warn the driver or slow the vehicle as it sped through flashing red lights, a stop sign, and a T-intersection. The plaintiffs argue that Tesla’s technology detected the parked Chevrolet Tahoe but failed to trigger any alerts or braking response before the fatal collision.
They also allege that Tesla should have restricted the use of Autopilot (known as geofencing) to highways and other environments the system was designed for — not the rural road where the crash occurred.
Tesla strongly denies the claims, saying the accident was caused by driver distraction, not a technology malfunction. In a statement, the company said:
“The evidence clearly shows that this crash had nothing to do with Tesla’s Autopilot technology. Instead, like so many unfortunate accidents since cellphones were invented, this was caused by a distracted driver.”
The driver, George McGee, was sued separately and settled the case out of court. He admitted to reaching for a dropped phone when the incident occurred.
A Rare Jury Trial with Major Implications
While Tesla frequently settles such cases or sees them dismissed, this trial is one of the few to reach a jury — and even rarer because U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom ruled last month that punitive damages may be pursued.
Bloom dismissed claims of defective manufacturing and negligent misrepresentation, but allowed other liability claims to stand. In her filing, she wrote:
“A reasonable jury could find that Tesla acted in reckless disregard of human life for the sake of developing their product and maximizing profit.”
This decision opens the door to potentially substantial financial penalties if Tesla is found liable — and could shape how the company approaches risk in its ongoing rollout of autonomous vehicle features, including its planned fleet of robotaxis.
Tesla’s Ongoing Scrutiny
Tesla has long promoted its Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) features as cutting-edge. Yet critics say the company’s marketing often overstates the system’s actual capabilities, leading drivers to become over-reliant.
Federal safety regulators share those concerns. In 2023, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) ordered a recall of 2.3 million Teslas to address Autopilot’s failure to alert inattentive drivers. Tesla said it had corrected the issue via an over-the-air update — a claim now under investigation for its credibility.
The FSD system, which Tesla CEO Elon Musk frequently touts as close to being fully autonomous, is also under federal investigation after being linked to three fatal crashes. Investigators are examining whether the system properly responds to low-visibility conditions such as fog or glare.
Despite warnings from regulators, Musk continues to make statements suggesting FSD allows hands-free, fully autonomous driving, raising concerns about consumer misunderstanding and misuse.
Robotaxi Future Could Hang in the Balance
The stakes of this trial go beyond compensation for a grieving family. Tesla is preparing to deploy hundreds of thousands of robotaxis on U.S. roads by the end of next year — a major strategic shift for the company and a huge financial gamble. The success of that program depends on public trust in Tesla’s driver-assistance technology.
In a recent test run in Austin, some robotaxis performed well, but at least one was reported to have driven down the wrong side of the road, highlighting the challenges that remain before full autonomy is safe and reliable.
If the Miami jury sides with the plaintiffs, the verdict could ripple across Tesla’s entire automated driving narrative, putting further legal and regulatory pressure on the company just as it attempts to scale up.
Elon Musk’s Tesla
You must Register or Login to post a comment.