"... where the rape occurred. She sleeps with the lights on, sometimes in her parents’ bed, she said. Uber’s lawyers said the driver had no criminal history, had received top ratings from passengers, had completed training and had acknowledged that he was aware of Uber’s rule that bans sex between drivers and passengers. They said the company was the industry leader in safety, developing a machine-learning tool to assess the risk of potential rides as well as other safety features and releasing public reports documenting assaults and other safety incidents on the platform. Sachin Kansal, Uber’s chief product officer, pushed back against claims that the company 'dragged its feet' on safety features like dashcams. However, 'I’ll be the first one to say we have not done enough,' he said. 'There’s a lot more that we have to do.'"
From "Uber Found Liable in Rape by Driver, Setting Stage for Thousands of Cases/In a federal bellwether case, the jury ordered the ride-hailing giant to pay $8.5 million to Jaylynn Dean, who said one of its drivers assaulted her in 2023" (NYT).
Posts
24 comments:
No criminal record & no reports of misbehavior means no liability in most states. Arizona is strict liability if this verdict stands.
Was that the same jury who believed E. Jean Carroll?
So did this driver's car have a dashcam? I can't think of what else the company should have done.
The idea that a driver would commit such a crime knowing he'd surely be caught is perplexing. He must have argued in his trial that it was consensual?
Italic off
I've read that in Sweden a staggering percentage of rapes in that country--over 90%--are committed by migrants. If Uber is responsible for this rape, are the politicians in Sweden also responsible for not doing due diligence before letting in a large number of migrants?
mccullough said...
No criminal record & no reports of misbehavior means no liability in most states. Arizona is strict liability if this verdict stands.
Not necessarily...
Sachin Kansal, Uber’s chief product officer, pushed back against claims that the company 'dragged its feet' on safety features like dashcams. However, 'I’ll be the first one to say we have not done enough,' he said. 'There’s a lot more that we have to do.'
Wow, talk about opening yourself to being spanked by the Hand Formula.
The Hand formula is a legal test used to determine whether someone's actions, or lack thereof, created an unreasonable risk of harm, thereby making them negligent. It was developed by Judge Learned Hand in a 1947 court case.
At its core, the Hand formula helps courts decide if the cost of preventing an accident was less than the potential cost of the accident itself. If it was, then failing to take precautions could be considered negligent. The formula can be expressed as: B < P * L.
B (Burden): This represents the cost or difficulty of taking adequate precautions to prevent the harm. It includes the financial expense, time, and effort required to implement safety measures.
P (Probability): This is the likelihood or chance that the harm will occur if precautions are not taken.
L (Loss): This refers to the gravity or severity of the potential harm if it does occur. It considers the extent of injury, damage, or other negative consequences.
According to the Hand formula, an individual or entity is considered negligent if the burden (B) of taking precautions is less than the probable gravity of the harm (L) multiplied by the probability that the harm will occur (P). In simpler terms, if it would have been relatively easy and inexpensive to prevent a potentially serious and likely accident, and those precautions were not taken, then negligence may be found.
“She reported the incident to the police and to Uber, which barred him. The driver did not face criminal charges and was not named in the suit.”
Sounds to me like this case was decided on the legal principle of ‘believe all women’. Not good enough for criminal charges (yet) but good enough to get a gullible jury to squeeze money out of one of those evil corporations, because capitalism bad.
Imagine if all the raped English school girls were entitled to $8.5 million each. Seems reasonable.
"...are the politicians in Sweden also responsible for not doing due diligence before letting in a large number of migrants?"
Yes, but they don't care. As in the United States, there is no penalty for letting rapists into the country or fighting to keep them here.
But illegal alien child rapists are defended to the point of riot by democrats.
Cybertaxi cannot get here fast enough.
Wow, no criminal charges brought. Sounds like a jury got its panties in a wad. So no punishment for the actual rapist, figures, must be a democrat.
Hiring humans was a tricky thing even before tort law and labor and employment law, and anti discrimination laws turned it into a Rubik's Cube. Does anyone not see that the incentives are pushing us toward a robotic disconnected trustless future?
Minority... Diversity report. There is no viable alternative that would mitigate progressive, imminent criminal affirmative action.
Sweden is competing with South Africa for the title: "Rape Capital of the World".
That result seems correct to me. Uber, like other companies in the "gig" economy, benefits from using independent contractors to perform services that used to be performed by employees. This is the flip side. Also, not to cast aspersions on immigrants from any particular region of the world, but doesn't it seem that Uber drivers often come from a particular region of the world. Is Uber aware of that?
A driver and navigator as competing interests mitigate the risk of either progressing with criminal intent. A camera would only have significant effect if the Anthropogenic Intelligence (AI) follows a moral code. That said, all's fair in lust and abortion, maybe, a fetus... feature, baby.
"She described “dozing in and out of consciousness” and being unable to stop the driver." Maybe stay at the boyfriend's place if that smashed. Alternatively, this is her explanation for no signs of struggle.im a bit skeptical after seeing clips of women threatening drivers with SA accusation not knowing a camera was rolling.
I want to say, "Well...at least she wasn't raped by a Hamas gang in Israel." She'd have been ignored by the press as they cheered on the Uber driver.
I want to say that. But I won't. It wouldn't be classy. Or on topic.
On topic, I don't know how Uber can be held liable for this. If they did the proper hiring procedures, there is no business protection for an insane person leaking into your business. And he might not have even been insane. Just...a baseline criminal with no record until now.
Why is Uber liable? If Uber is liable isn't any system which connects individuals liable for anything which happens to said individuals?
How does a dash cam prevent a rape?
Pointing at interior.
"As in the United States, there is no penalty for letting rapists into the country or fighting to keep them here."
Or for judges who let them off or release the accused on low or non-existent bail.
I had a grad school roommate in law school who explained that the courts like to just find the "deepest pocket," regardless of actual culpability. That seems at play here.
No way, without conviction on criminal charges, should Uber have been held responsible. Believe all womyn? Uber needs to pull out of the state immediately. Let them walk.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/38126742/mum-falsely-claimed-raped-good-samaritan/
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.