Last week [1] Tesla notably got an Apple Engineer (named "James Harding" though that online profile seems to be gone now) to file a court declaration claiming t

Last week [1] Tesla notably got an Apple Engineer (named "James Harding" though that online profile seems to be gone now) to file a court declaration claiming there was evidence on the phone that the deceased driver was playing games. The action was notable because discovery had already closed and the declaration was not a deposition or anything. This a notable detail that the linked CNN article neglects. E.g. the statement from "James Harding" likely pushed things in Tesla's favor, the statement could even have perhaps been fabricated (and/or it would have been prohibitively expensive to fairly interrogate the new evidence), and "James Harding" is likely absent from the settlement and could now be liable personally (resulting in a new lawsuit that won't be covered in the news). Whether the driver was playing games or not, this case's outcome underscores Tesla's aggressively litigious behavior, which contrasts sharply with the issue of real highway safety. What if everybody could enable "Elon Mode" ( https://futurism.com/the-byte/tesla-trouble-elon-mode https://futurism.com/the-byte/tesla-trouble-elon-mode ) and just turn off safety features? [1] https://appleinsider.com/articles/24/04/04/tesla-wants-apples-help-to-beat-autopilot-death-lawsuit https://appleinsider.com/articles/24/04/04/tesla-wants-apple... > The family is unhappy about a decision by Tesla to submit a declaration from Apple engineer James Harding, stating that Apple had determined Huang was actively playing a game at the time of the crash. > Furthermore, Tesla and Apple are accused of "trying to circumvent the discovery process" by using Harding's word as testimony instead of a deposition. The deposition is also submitted five months after the end of the discovery period, which meant that the family's lawyers couldn't question Harding before the trial itself. > The lawyers have subpoenaed Apple for more information about the declaration. Apple responded in March that the lawyers were seeking "a substantial volume of Apple's privileged material."