Norwegian man in court, blaming his Tesla for speeding.
[https://www.tv2.no/broom/tatt-i-90-km/t-i-50-sone-skyldte-pa-teslaen/17987356/](https://www.tv2.no/broom/tatt-i-90-km/t-i-50-sone-skyldte-pa-teslaen/17987356/) (Norwegian article: translated below) Caught doing 90 km/h in a 50 zone – blamed the Tesla Now the car owner has been to court. **TLDR:** The man was caught driving 90 km/h in a 50 zone and blamed the Tesla’s autopilot. The court rejected his explanation about faulty signage and the autopilot’s failure to detect the speed limit. He was sentenced to 18 days of suspended prison, fined 16,500 kroner, and lost his driver’s license for nine months. The court also dismissed his arguments for special consideration to shorten the license suspension period. **Full translation:** The man blamed the car’s autopilot and refused to accept having his driver’s license confiscated when he was stopped driving at nearly twice the speed limit in a 50 km/h zone. Now, the man in his 40s has been in court. It didn’t go very well... The incident took place during a late-night drive in March this year. The man was driving a Tesla southbound through the Nøstved Tunnel in Follo. The speed limit on that stretch is normally 90 km/h. However, that evening the right lane was closed, so traffic was diverted into the left lane and the speed limit was reduced—first to 70 km/h, then to 50 km/h. Near the tunnel exit, police were conducting a laser speed check in the 50 km/h zone. The Tesla was clocked at 90 km/h. The local newspaper Østlandets Blad was the first to report the case. **Did not see the speed limit signs** The man admitted guilt and agreed to pay the fine, but he refused to accept the confiscation of his driver’s license, which is why the case ended up in court. There, he explained that he had set the car’s “autopilot” to always follow the speed limit. He further stated that he had not seen any signs showing the reduced limits of 70 or 50 km/h. However, he had seen signs with arrows indicating that the road narrowed to one lane. The senior police officer who conducted the laser check testified that he had driven through the tunnel before the operation started and that the signage was functioning as intended. He also explained that the road traffic control center monitored the tunnel at all times and that during the check he could see the signs showing the right lane was closed. Vehicles were stopped both before and after the defendant. **Drove too fast in the tunnel, demanded 140,000 in compensation** *SELF-DRIVING:* Tesla is among the car brands at the forefront of driver assistance and self-driving technology. But that does not exempt the driver from responsibility if, for example, they break the speed limit. Photo: Tesla. **Ultimately the driver’s responsibility** The court’s ruling states: *The court finds it possible to rule out that there was anything wrong with the signage. The tunnel is under video surveillance and well-lit. The defendant is the only one to have claimed that the signs did not display the reduced speed limit, and this explanation was first given at the court hearing regarding the request for continued license confiscation. Neither the road traffic control center, the police, nor other road users have observed or reported any missing signage.* Blaming the car also did not work: *Regarding the defendant’s statement that the car did not detect the speed limit signs, the court notes that it is in any case the defendant’s obligation to be aware of the speed limit at all times, and that it would be negligent to rely blindly on the car’s technical systems being correctly set. The court therefore finds it proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the defendant acted as described in the indictment, and that he at the very least acted with gross negligence. He is therefore convicted in accordance with the charges.* **Drove recklessly past an unmarked police car – then the blue lights came on** *CHECKPOINT:* Police had set up their laser speed trap just before the tunnel exit, where the speed limit was reduced to 50 km/h. Illustrative photo. Photo: Ingvild Gjerdsjø / TV 2 **Also had to pay court costs** The result was an 18-day suspended prison sentence, with a probation period of two years, as well as a fine of 16,500 kroner, or alternatively 16 days in prison. The man was also banned from driving for nine months. He tried to argue for special circumstances that should reduce the disqualification period, but this was not accepted: *The defendant has pointed out that he is the only one in his family with a driver’s license, that he is responsible for a 12-year-old daughter, and that he suffers from severe back problems that make it difficult for him to get around. Using public transport is challenging. The court notes that losing the right to drive will normally cause inconvenience for the person affected, as well as for others, and that the defendant’s situation is not significantly different from what must normally be expected in such cases.* In addition to the fine, the man must also pay legal costs to the state, totaling 2,000 kroner.
