Tesla Cams and Lying Drivers in Accidents

[FutureBoy]

So I occasionally like to watch Teslacam Stories.

Over and over there are instances of drivers of non-Tesla vehicles that get into an accident with a Tesla. Often the drivers will then reportedly completely lie about how the accident happened. Once the Teslacam footage is shown they then recant their story.

So how long is it going to take for the general populace to realize there is a really good chance that everything they do in the close vicinity of a Tesla is being recorded for posterity? At the moment I suppose people just take a chance on the lie and can hope that the Teslacam didn't catch anything... If I recall correctly though, isn't it a crime to lie to the police?

Along those lines... How many young folks are going to want to learn to hack the footage so that they can still take the car to romance ridge without the embarrassment of mom and dad seeing the footage?

Advertisement

 

[Cyber_Dav]

Is Teslacam footage admissible in court? How can it be proven it wasn't tampered with?

It's not just Teslas, I've had 3rd party dash cams for years.

 

[FutureBoy]

Is Teslacam footage admissible in court? How can it be proven it wasn't tampered with?

It's not just Teslas, I've had 3rd party dash cams for years.

I'm not a lawyer but based on what is described in the videos from people who submitted them, the videos have been used in court and even before court when just talking to the cops.

I think the big difference between dashcam footage and Teslacam is that Teslacam gets so much more context. Many of the videos show what happens as vehicles speed up or slow down in traffic. The video captures both sides of the Tesla facing backward like a rear view mirror plus a forward looking video like a dashcam. This context provides coverage of what happens when a vehicle gets cut off. Or when 2 vehicles merge into the same lame at the same time. Or when the Tesla gets rear-ended.

Plus since all the Teslas have the cameras means that the chance that there is Teslacam video available is probably much higher than if there might be dashcam video from another vehicle.

 

[TruckDaddy]

"Is Teslacam footage admissible in court? How can it be proven it wasn't tampered with?"

Because the video is probably provided to law enforcement within minutes, and deepfakes take days with tons of very expensive equipment and personnel to pull off even halfway convincing tampered video.

 

[Luke42]

"Is Teslacam footage admissible in court? How can it be proven it wasn't tampered with?"

Because the video is probably provided to law enforcement within minutes, and deepfakes take days with tons of very expensive equipment and personnel to pull off even halfway convincing tampered video.

This is why evidence has a chain of custody.

Many kinds of evidence can be tampered with. This is not a new problem, and it is not unique to electronic evidence.

Source: the IT security courses I had to take back when I was a sysadmin.

 

[Dids]

Is Teslacam footage admissible in court? How can it be proven it wasn't tampered with?

It's not just Teslas, I've had 3rd party dash cams for years.

Tamper with as in fake video of the other car hitting you when it was you that hit him? How does one do that?

 

[Crissa]

Tamper with as in fake video of the other car hitting you when it was you that hit him? How does one do that?

Big computers, editing software, lots of ways to hand over deceptive video.

-Crissa

 

[Dids]

Big computers, editing software, lots of ways to hand over deceptive video.

-Crissa

I suppose it wouldn't be that hard to turn a red light to green if you ran a red light and got hit... then claim it was a green light. As long as no one else witnessed.

 

[Cyber_Dav]

I suppose it wouldn't be that hard to turn a red light to green if you ran a red light and got hit... then claim it was a green light. As long as no one else witnessed.

The Hummer EV looked real, but didn't even exist! How's that for fake camera footage.

Even easier, Nikola filmed a truck moving down the road... and it didn't have an engine.

Anything is possible these days. Money and time.

And police won't take custody of the Teslacam footage until the case goes to court. They don't even respond to traffic accidents in most cases anymore. So 'chain of custody' doesn't really come into play until well after the accident occurs.

Think minor fender bender where a year later the "victim" claims you rear ended them at 60 MPH (in a 35 zone) and now they have whiplash. It would be (relatively) easy to alter the cam footage to show you were doing 25, not 60.

This is just my musings, though, so if you disagree that is fine. I think I am just feeling more talkative than usual tonight. I've been in 1 accident. There were no police. And I do own video editing software.

 

[Crissa]

They have to keep their claims to things which are probable and not gain police examination.

And they have to hand over the footage on a non-writable disk, so everyone is on the same page. Evidence has to be supported, impeached, etc.

So if it didn't look right, you would have a chance to examine why.

-Crissa

 

[Sirfun]

This is one of the reason's I think Tesla is wanting to go into car insurance. They know that they will have a huge source of data to make their job easier.

 

[Dids]

This is one of the reason's I think Tesla is wanting to go into car insurance. They know that they will have a huge source of data to make their job easier.

A car that is in FSD mode that has an accident is a defective product?
A person that calls/causes a robotic vehicle to move is the operator?
If I only use the vehicle in FSD do I need a license to drive?
I think questions like this are why Tesla wants to be in insurance. I can imagine my insurance company saying there has to be a licensed operator or insuring at the level of risk for a licensed operator instead of probably much lower risk of FSD.

 

[MEDICALJMP]

Alterations to video leaves electronic fingerprints of tampering. As others have noted, this is neither fast or cheap. Nor can you do it on the fly in your car while waiting for the fuzz to show up.
Recently there was a road rage incident here involving Model 3 and some jerk. Jerk claimed 3 rear ended him. Police looked at the footage. Guess who got ticketed?

https://www.ketv.com/article/tesla-...driver-ticketed-for-reckless-driving/34536776

 

[DrChaz]

Is Teslacam footage admissible in court? How can it be proven it wasn't tampered with?

It's not just Teslas, I've had 3rd party dash cams for years.

No evidence is perfect. Even the Tesla cameras don’t provide audio recordings. In most cases, police will ask to see video footage if you have it and they may use it to determine fault in an accident. In most cases, insurance companies take statements from their clients and decide which company pays for what. They want to keep lawyers and courts out of it. I am certain your insurance company will want to see any video footage that may exist.

Video evidence can be admitted to court. The person who handled the video must testify as to how it was created and can be cross examined. It’s really a matter of how believable you are.

I like to show occasional sentry footage from my parking lot at work to colleagues. I do it because I’m geeking out about the features of my Tesla, but I also want the community at large to know my car is recording them.

If someone decides to lie about an incident, it may be enough to state, “You realize I have this incident recorded from 8 different camera angles.”