GM's Cruise Didn't Admit To Pedestrian Crash Because Of A Bad Internet Connection

A new report released Thursday say GM’s Cruise leadership really did want to tell regulators about one of their self-driving taxis dragging a pedestrian 20 feet, but the internet connection sucked so they just didn’t mention it. To refresh your memory, on October 2, 2023, a woman was hit by a human-driven car while in a crosswalk in San Francisco. She slid over the hood and into the path of a Cruise taxi, which then dragged her 20 feet to the curb, trapping her under the car until emergency crews could free her.

People Are Relying on ADAS to Do Things it Can’t Do

A law firm hired by GM to investigate the incident found that, when Cruise handed over footage of the crash to the California DMV, it didn’t mention the dragging incident, preferring to let “…the video speak for itself.” Turns out, however, the video shown to investigators wasn’t the whole video due to internet connection issues, from The Verge:

In response to the crash, the California Department of Motor Vehicles suspended Cruise’s license to operate its vehicles in the state. The department also accused the company of withholding portions of the video of the incident that showed its vehicle dragging the pedestrian to the curb in an attempt to pull over. Cruise denies the allegation, claiming it showed the agency the whole video.

The law firm’s report appears to support both claims. The firm concludes that “the weight of the evidence” confirms that Cruise “played or attempted to play the Full Video” depicting its car dragging the woman to the curb in its October 3rd briefing with regulators and other government officials.

“However, in three of these meetings, internet connectivity issues likely precluded or hampered them from seeing the Full Video clearly and fully,” the report states. “And Cruise failed to augment the Full Video by affirmatively pointing out the pullover maneuver and dragging of the pedestrian.”

Over 100 Cruise employees were aware of the pedestrian-dragging incident prior to the October 3rd meeting with the San Francisco mayor’s office, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the DMV, and other government officials. But Cruise said nothing about the pedestrian being dragged, instead “letting the video speak for itself.” A bad internet connection prevented that from happening.

“Because Cruise adopted that approach, it did not verbally point out these facts,” the firm says.

OK, but, that’s still not good, Cruise. You could have said something instead of shrugging your shoulders and saying “what’s on video is what happened” and then, what, just assuming regulators were super cool about a pedestrian dragging? Also, how do you not use a downloaded hard copy of video evidence in something like an experimental transportation investigation? This whole thing reminds me of being in college in 2009, when everyone understood the internet but the professors, so you could get away with submitting stuff late due to “connectivity issues.”

The lawyers’ report also found that, in the aftermath of the crash, Cruise made no attempt to clarify its role in injuring the pedestrian in the media, instead fixating on reports that blamed Cruise for the initial incident. It seems the lingering philosophy of “move fast and break things” also played a part in the crash:

Largely, a culture of antagonism toward regulators at Cruise helped contribute to these failings. In its interviews with employees, Cruise “observed too much of an ‘us versus them’ attitude… which is not indicative of a healthy, mutually productive relationship,” says the Quinn Emanuel report.

The firm says it is a “fundamentally flawed approach” to assume a video can “speak for itself” and remove the need to disclose all details to regulators and government officials. “As one Cruise employee stated in a text message to another employee about this matter, our ‘leaders have failed us,’” the report states.

Right now, Cruise is under investigation from the California DMV and other California agencies, NHTSA, the Department of Justice, and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Rookie numbers when compared to Tesla’s long list of investigations, but still not good.