Tesla just hit a $200 million speed bump in a Florida courtroom over a deadly crash involving its much-hyped Autopilot system.
A federal jury in Miami, in the Southern District of Florida, has pinned partial blame on Elon Musk’s electric car giant for a tragic 2019 collision in Key Largo, Florida, that killed 22-year-old Naibel Benavides and left her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, with severe injuries, awarding the plaintiffs a hefty sum in punitive and compensatory damages, as Breitbart reports.
Let’s rewind to 2019, when this heartbreaking incident unfolded in Key Largo with a Tesla Model S driven by George McGee.
Tesla driver’s fatal distraction exposed
McGee, trusting Tesla’s Enhanced Autopilot to handle the road, dropped his phone and bent down to grab it, assuming the system would brake for any obstacles.
Instead, he barreled through an intersection at over 60 mph, smashing into a parked car near Benavides and Angulo, who were standing nearby.
The impact was catastrophic — Benavides was thrown 75 feet and tragically lost her life, while Angulo survived with broken bones, a brain injury, and lasting psychological trauma.
Autopilot’s safety claims under fire
Fast forward to the courtroom, where the plaintiffs — Benavides’ family and Angulo — argued that Tesla’s partially automated system had glaring flaws the company should’ve fixed long ago.
Their lawyers didn’t hold back, claiming Musk and Tesla exaggerated Autopilot’s capabilities, practically begging drivers to over-rely on tech that wasn’t ready for prime time.
They even suggested the system should’ve been limited to specific roads where it could operate safely, instead of being a free-for-all disaster waiting to happen.
Expert testimony slams Tesla oversight
A former senior adviser at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration testified that Tesla’s owner’s manual — packed with critical warnings — wasn’t exactly bedtime reading for most drivers.
The expert witness also noted Tesla had been grappling with drivers ignoring computer warnings well before this crash, and hadn’t bothered with geo-fencing, a tech other manufacturers used to restrict driver-assistance systems on risky roads.
“I believe they were using that as a way to sell more cars,” the expert told plaintiffs’ lawyer Brett Schreiber, pointing to Tesla’s geo-fencing dodge. Well, if the shoe fits, it turns out prioritizing sales over safety can cost you more than a few bucks in court.
Jury verdict sends message
Tesla’s defense team countered that they’ve been upfront with customers about proper Autopilot use, pinning the primary fault on McGee’s reckless driving.
They argued Tesla’s mission is to save lives through innovation, and a ruling against them would chill technological progress — though a $200 million verdict might cool their jets anyway.
The jury wasn’t fully buying it, assigning one-third of the blame to Tesla, and while the plaintiffs sought $345 million, they awarded $200 million in punitive damages, plus compensatory damages still stings. It’s a reminder that cutting-edge tech doesn’t excuse cutting corners on accountability — actions have consequences, even for billion-dollar disruptors.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Mae Slater
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.conservativejournalreview.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
