Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday April 01 2019, @05:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the "shocking-act-of-vandalism" dept.

Tesla Sentry Mode catches deliberate attack against Model 3, vandal arrested

A Tesla Model 3 owner is thanking the video recording capabilities of Sentry Mode after it captured a shocking act of vandalism against his electric car. As could be seen in footage from the security feature, a woman stealthily yet aggressively keyed the Model 3 as she was ushering her children inside a Dodge Journey SUV, resulting in deep scratches to the vehicle's body panels.

A short clip[*] of the incident was shared on YouTube by Rafael "Teslatino" Santoni, who noted in a conversation with Teslarati that while the incident definitely appeared premeditated, the Model 3 owner could not determine the lady's motivation for the attack. The damage from the incident was quoted at $900 in repair costs by a third-party body shop.

Fortunately for the Model 3 owner, the footage from Sentry Mode was able to capture the entire incident, and it featured a clear shot of the woman's face. With her identity determined, the attack was promptly reported to the police, who later arrested the woman on vandalism charges. It remains to be seen if she will be required to pay for the damages she caused to the Model 3.

[...] While remarkable for their technology and performance, Tesla's electric vehicles remain polarizing to some groups of people. Attacks on Teslas have been recorded in the past, including a road rage incident against a Model 3 that resulted in an instant karma crash, as well as an unfortunate incident involving vandals and a Supercharger. Some electric car owners have also found themselves becoming victim to acts colloquially known as ICE-ing, which refers to gas-powered cars (intentionally or unintentionally) blocking access to charging stations.

[*] Direct links to the original video and to some extra footage on YouTube. --martyb

See also: Elon Musk teases "Teslaquila" update while trademark's fate is uncertain


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday April 01 2019, @07:11PM (6 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 01 2019, @07:11PM (#823217) Journal

    Gee why would anyone have a problem with a ${business | store | theme park | residential home} that puts them under constant surveillance.

    Is that mode always on? Optional? Can the someone get a subpoena for their camera's footage if a crime happens nearby? (ie can the footage benefit anyone besides the camera owner?)

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 01 2019, @07:21PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 01 2019, @07:21PM (#823222)

    At minimum most ${business | store | theme park | residential home} won't come park next to you when you don't expect it.

    • (Score: 5, Touché) by DannyB on Monday April 01 2019, @07:40PM (3 children)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 01 2019, @07:40PM (#823233) Journal

      You are on surveillance cameras often. Nobody cares. I doubt the footage is ever reviewed unless some kind of incident or crime occurs. Why would it matter that some or all cars might potentially have cameras? Or traffic signals.

      I don't really understand your point.

      The criminal did not key the car because it had a camera. If the criminal had enough brains to realize there might be a camera, she would not have done it. There was some other motive. Having the camera was a good thing. Also, some cars now have dash cams. And some of those are also on when the car is parked.

      With modern tech, cameras are only going to get cheaper, and more plentiful. You can't stop it. I can't stop it. If you can't deal with it, then it would be best to stay home with the cameras in your smart tv, laptop, and with Alexa and Google constantly listening.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 01 2019, @07:55PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 01 2019, @07:55PM (#823239)

        Yeah, we've generally accepted being on surveillance cameras, basically always. That doesn't mean its ideal.

        I don't apreciate the one-sided access to the information. Camera footage will be used to prove guilt, but an innocent person would have a hard time getting access to footage showing them in other place to prove innocence. Or many place in public the surveillance cameras can (at least theoretically) be used to help people besides the owners of the cameras, which makes some offset for the encroachment on the public space they impose. Like a guy getting mugged just outside a store, the police could use the store's cameras to find the muggers. But privately owned surveillance vans just erode on the public space without any realistic benefit for anyone other than the owner. Get mugged next to a tesla and I doubt the car's footage will be available to find the muggers.

        And this crime wasn't motivated by the camera's presence, but I think some people are upset by constant encroachment of surveillance cameras everywhere so it could be a motivator for disliking teslas, but you would be an idiot to key one because you hate the fact that it has a camera which can see you do that.

        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @12:22AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 02 2019, @12:22AM (#823332)

          but an innocent person would have a hard time getting access to footage showing them in other place to prove innocence

          Why? An investigator usually checks the places that might have recorded the incident or an alibi. If you want a private camera data, ask for it in the local news. Maybe you will find some eyewitnesses this way as well.

          • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday April 02 2019, @05:53PM

            by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 02 2019, @05:53PM (#823711) Journal

            That is a good way to get unknown camera data. Like someone flying a drone got the whole thing on camera from above.

            But your investigators (on your side) can check with local businesses within eye shot. They can even just visually look for any obvious cameras. They can ask for the footage. If they don't get it, put them on notice about spoilation of evidence and get a court ordered subpoena for the footage. The court helps either side obtain evidence that can help its case.

            --
            People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 01 2019, @08:39PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 01 2019, @08:39PM (#823250)

    Gee why would anyone have a problem with a ${business | store | theme park | residential home} that puts them under constant surveillance.

    You missed "government" in your list.