The NYT story cites Tesla court filings about the police's determination — "The police faulted the Tesla driver — not the car — for his inattention and his driv

The NYT story cites Tesla court filings about the police's determination — "The police faulted the Tesla driver — not the car — for his inattention and his driving at an unsafe speed," Mr. McCarthy wrote. IANAL, but given no other info about the investigators' conclusions, I wouldn't necessarily assume that the truck driver didn't have some* fault, and California isn't a state where it's either/or when it comes to blame — i.e. both drivers can share partial blame and recover damages. California has a couple of laws [0] that mandate "reasonable or prudent" speed, e.g. > No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. The truck met the requirement [1] for signaling a change (100 feet beforehand). Is it "reasonable or prudent" for the Tesla driver to maintain speed (nevermind accelerate at the last second) with the truck slowly entering the lane? Especially with the left lane traffic having slowed down enough that, in the span of the 5 second clip, the Tesla is seen passing 2 cars on their right before hitting the truck? [0] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=22350 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=22108.&nodeTreePath=15.6&lawCode=VEH https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...