# GM faces lawsuit after crash between motorcyclist and self-driving Chevy Bolt



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

Suit claims Cruise Automation vehicle made an abrupt lane change and injured a man riding behind

Oscar Nilsson's suit over the Dec. 7, 2017 crash, _The Mercury News_ reported Tuesday, claims he was injured while riding behind a Cruise Automation Chevrolet Bolt that had someone in the driver's seat, but who did not have their hands on the steering wheel. When the car started to change into a left lane, it abruptly returned to the initial lane and collided with Nilsson, who now says the crash resulted in injuries that have forced him to take disability leave from work, according to _The Mercury News_.

But details of the crash in a *report filed by GM (!!!!!) *to the California Department of Motor Vehiclescontradicts Nilsson's claim. The automaker reported the Bolt, operating in autonomous mode in heavy traffic, stopped a requested lane change from the center lane to the left lane because a vehicle decelerated and the gap was deemed too small than initially thought. While the Bolt was trying to center itself in the initial lane again when Nilsson, "wobbled and fell over," while trying to lane split. The damage to the Bolt was a, "long scuff on passenger side of the vehicle," according to the DMV report.

Initial report and UberPeople discussion thread here.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Meaningless.

Lots of people file suits. Guess who has the 360 degree video and LiDar data and can easily show the truth?

This suit will be dropped.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

RamzFanz said:


> Meaningless.
> 
> Lots of people file suits. Guess who has the 360 degree video and LiDar data and can easily show the truth?
> 
> This suit will be dropped.


I am sure that data incriminates GM. Why? Follow me -
"According to *the police traffic collision report*, a copy of which was obtained by Popular Science, the driver of the Cruise said that "*he attempted to take control of the self-driving vehicle by grabbing the wheel*, but simultaneously collided with [the motorcycle]." The weather was clear, the roadway, dry. The fire department took Nilsson to the hospital.". There is only one situation in which a human monitor will try to override a computer command - When the human realizes the output of that command generates an error. Otherwise, what would be the reason for the monitor (Mr. Manuel DeJesus Salazar was in the driver's seat of a 2016 Chevrolet Bolt vehicle, manufactured by Defendant General Motors LLC (hereinafter "Self-Driving Vehicle") to try and take control?

According to the lawsuit "7. At the same time and place, Mr. Salazar had the Self-Driving Vehicle engaged in a self-driving mode, and he *kept his hands off of the Self-Driving Vehicle's steering wheel*.
8. At the same time and place, there came a point when Mr. Nilsson was riding his motorcycle *behind* the Self-Driving Vehicle.
9. As Mr. Nilsson was riding his motorcycle, Mr. Salazar, traveling directly in front of Mr. Nilsson, commanded the Self-Driving Vehicle to *change lanes to the left*.
10. Once the Self-Driving Vehicle *cleared the roadway*, Mr. Nilsson proceeded to *travel straight.*
11. However, at the same time, the Self-Driving Vehicle *suddenly veered back into Mr. Nilsson's lane*, striking Mr. Nilsson and knocking him to the ground. "

I've already mentioned how - "As the DMV report shows - "the motorcyclist was determined to be at fault for attempting to overtake and pass another vehicle on the right under conditions that did not permit that movement in safety in violation of CVC 21755(a)"
BUT
"Now you still have to look at that report in detail and notice on the bottom, how it was submitted by KEVIN CHU, Associate Director, AV Engineering at GM Cruise LLC, so you could consider it BIASED once reflecting only a one sided point of view of the events."
AND
"While the police will make a report and may issue traffic violations or even make an arrest, *they do not determine fault in an accident* for the insurance company. A police report will be one of the pieces of evidence used in the investigation of the crash, but it is not the final word. - https://www.insurancehotline.com/fault-determination-after-an-accident-what-you-should-know/ (May 7th, 2013)"

AGAIN, please go to your wife and daughter and take your time to teach them how to improve their driving skills, because they will need it for the rest of their lives. Afterwards you are the one that said


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> I am sure that data incriminates GM. Why? Follow me -
> "According to *the police traffic collision report*, a copy of which was obtained by Popular Science, the driver of the Cruise said that "*he attempted to take control of the self-driving vehicle by grabbing the wheel*, but simultaneously collided with [the motorcycle]." The weather was clear, the roadway, dry. The fire department took Nilsson to the hospital.". There is only one situation in which a human monitor will try to override a computer command - When the human realizes the output of that command generates an error. Otherwise, what would be the reason for the monitor (Mr. Manuel DeJesus Salazar was in the driver's seat of a 2016 Chevrolet Bolt vehicle, manufactured by Defendant General Motors LLC (hereinafter "Self-Driving Vehicle") to try and take control?
> 
> According to the lawsuit "7. At the same time and place, Mr. Salazar had the Self-Driving Vehicle engaged in a self-driving mode, and he *kept his hands off of the Self-Driving Vehicle's steering wheel*.
> ...


Oh Jocker, don't ever change. Your parody of an honest debater is really funny!

So now GMs report is biased because they wrote it but the motorcyclist should be believed word for word?

GM has the evidence. There will be no doubt as to who was at fault. The lane is the car ahead's until they have exited the lane. GM would be idiots to fight this if they were at fault. They would settle fast and make it go away.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

RamzFanz said:


> Oh Jocker, don't ever change. Your parody of an honest debater is really funny!
> 
> So now GMs report is biased because they wrote it but the motorcyclist should be believed word for word?
> 
> GM has the evidence. There will be no doubt as to who was at fault. The lane is the car ahead's until they have exited the lane. GM would be idiots to fight this if they were at fault. They would settle fast and make it go away.


Why settle if was not GM's robot fault, as you try imagine here?


----------

