Although I have been enjoying the "competitive mode" now and then... (ahem), I cant help but think that if an accident occured, be it your fault or not; if you would be doomed in court if the data in your GM "black box" was read into the record showing that you were in that mode while driving?
Or at least give an insurance company a reason not to pay off...
Something to ponder.....?

 

Last I checked, it wasn't illegal to turn Traction Control off.

 

I'm not sure but, I believe the "black box" will only record the speed of a vehicle during the last 2-3 secs before the airbags deploy. AH/TC are factory options on some cars. Tons of cars out there do not have this option. There's no laws on the books that state you have to have these options engaged during driving. That's why you have Comp. mode.

 

Good Question.

 

Huh?! No way.

First, the black-box information is not readily admissable into a court case. That would be a significant decision in and of itself to even have it admitted and I would imagine there would have to be significant just cause to do so (i.e. indications of extremely high speed, racing maybe etc. etc.)

Second, as someone said, there are MANY MANY high HP cars without this option, and it's not only an option, but it's engagement is an option.

 

Here you go.
http://www.frankhunt.com/FRANK/corve...ag_Sensor.html

 

[QUOTE=yellow01]Huh?! No way.

First, the black-box information is not readily admissable into a court case. That would be a significant decision in and of itself to even have it admitted and I would imagine there would have to be significant just cause to do so (i.e. indications of extremely high speed, racing maybe etc. etc.)

This is not entirely true. The "black box" has already been used to convict two young men in NY for street racing and homicide. One young man who was in his teens at the time of the incident was driving his dad's C5 and racing another young idiot in a Merc. The 2 Jacka$$'s caused an accident and killed another motorist. The data recorder stated that the kid was going over 120 mph at the time of the accident.

 

Don't know for fact but I'm guessing your insurance company might try and use that against you if you file a claim.

 

Why would GM put somenthing in your car that voids the insurance?

 

I recall an incident whereby the "black box" was used in court when an NFL player died in an accident, and his family sued GM. GM proved that the box recorded seat belts were not being used prior to the accident. GM won, if memory serves correctly.

 

[QUOTE=yellow01]

First, the black-box information is not readily admissable into a court case. That would be a significant decision in and of itself to even have it admitted and I would imagine there would have to be significant just cause to do so (i.e. indications of extremely high speed, racing maybe etc. etc.)
QUOTE]

Well, whether the "black box" information would be admissible would be determined by a judge's ruling based, hopefully, on sound application of the rules of evidence. Things to consider are (1) would it provide information that is relevant to the issue at hand. If it tends to show that something is more or less likely to have occurred and speaks to the issue at hand it could be considered "evidence". Another consideration would be reliability. This would call for expert testimony most likely. Someone would need to testify to what this "black box" does, and reliability and exactly what the information it provides tells the court / jurors.

There are numerous considerations. In some circumstances and for some purposes, "black box" information could probably be admitted. There may be plenty of circumstances where it would properly be excluded.

As I have said, now probably a hundred times, issues like this require a case by case determination with an eye toward the specific circumstances of each case.

In sum, it may or may not be admissible under different circumstances.

 

Well, whether the "black box" information would be admissible would be determined by a judge's ruling based, hopefully, on sound application of the rules of evidence. Things to consider are -- would it provide information that is relevant to the issue at hand. If it tends to show that something is more or less likely to have occurred and speaks to the issue at hand it could be considered "evidence". Another consideration would be reliability. This would call for expert testimony most likely. Someone would need to testify to what this "black box" does, and reliability and exactly what the information it provides tells the court / jurors.

There are numerous considerations. In some circumstances and for some purposes, "black box" information could probably be admitted. There may be plenty of circumstances where it would properly be excluded.

As I have said, now probably a hundred times, issues like this require a case by case determination with an eye toward the specific circumstances of each case.

In sum, it may or may not be admissible under different circumstances.

 

I've never seen a "STUPIDITY" exclusion in an insurance policy.

If there were, just think how much money the insurance companies could make and conversly how many claims would be paid.

 

Guys I did say that it wasn't readily admissable, I didn't say it wasn't It's not automatic to be included in any proceedings.

The example above involves deaths and high speed/racing, which was my example of significant cause to admit the contents of the BB.

Understand this would be case by case and at the court's discretion.

 

Didn't mean any harm by my comment there friend. Just wanted to point out that the "black box" had been used in court.

 

Not to any more than necessary, but nothing is "automatically" included in court. Prosecutor is correct - the party intending to introduce such information obtained from the box would have to demonstrate its relevance, just like any other piece of evidence, either physical or testimonial. But relevance is a very low threshold. I agree that it would require an expert witness to both establish its reliability and to authenticate the print-out of the recorded data. But this is very easy to do, and I suspect a "battle-of-the-experts" would be a very difficult proposition with something that has become or will soon be an industry standard.

All that being said, I think the answer to RatedX's question is that since it's not illegal to turn off, on/off status off the mode would not IMO be relevant to show recklessness or negligence, though other information from the box certainly might be (like speed, etc.).