Live data from Hacker News

NTSB ‘unhappy’ with Tesla release of investigative information in fatal crash

washingtonpost.com

101–102 of 102 posts

Re: NTSB ‘unhappy’ with Tesla release of investigative information in fatal crash

#101
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They saw a video that showed that she failed to yield and found a body that wasn't anywhere near a crosswalk. There was nothing more for them to investigate at that point, because the other points weren't relevant. So they were very likely done with their investigation at that point. It was a horrific accident and there's pretty much always something someone could have done better, but as far as traffic laws go, it w…

Not being near a crosswalk actually means in most places that you are allowed to cross there . You will obviously have to yield for other traffic but pedestrians crossing the road are an expected thing, wherever you drive. The vehicle braking or not braking would be one input into deciding whether the driver was under the influence and could shift liability from the pedestrian to the driver to some extent. In lots of…

I suspect they did check the human for inebriation, but I saw no indication the driver was drunk, so I expect that didn't matter. I honestly don't think they would have cited a human driver in this circumstance unless they left the scene of the accident or were drunk.

I think the problem people have here is that this was treated exactly like a normal accident and maybe they shouldn't have. But we have the NTSB to examine the engineering of the car, that's not something the cops are equipped to do.

The police did their check and released their report once it was done, which is a very standard practice. It can't have taken them that long--the police station where you get accident reports is on the other side of the Mill Ave. bridge from the accident.

Re: NTSB ‘unhappy’ with Tesla release of investigative information in fatal crash

#102
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the distinction between the two that changes the justification? I see those things as part of each other, as in institutional secrecy is bred from ongoing inquests in perpetuity.

The NTSB has a 50+ year history of producing detailed reports on accidents: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/Ac... The notion that they'd suddenly turn secretive now seems absurd to me. Given their expertise and excellent track record, I think it's reasonable to trust them when they say they want to completed the investigation and publish a proper report, just like they do with other accident…

Just to clarify, "secrecy" is not a word to which I attach negative sentiment.
Post reply on HN