Tesla road rage driver's new arrest a ‘foreseeable consequence,' California victims say
Radimak, 38, was arraigned Thursday in Honolulu, Hawaii, where he pleaded not guilty.
According to police, on May 8, an 18-year-old woman was parking her car with her 35-year-old mother in the passenger seat when a gray Tesla sped past them. Words were exchanged, and the man allegedly assaulted both women before fleeing in the Tesla.
Radimak, who was arrested the following day, faces charges of misdemeanor assault and unauthorized entry into a motor vehicle. Bail was set at $100,000.
'When justice is not done, the public is endangered,' said prominent victims' rights attorney Gloria Allred at news conference in Los Angeles on Friday that included several of Radimak's previous victims. 'He goes to Hawaii, and then all of this happens … yes, absolutely, failure of the system.'
In 2023, Radimak was sentenced to five years in prison for attacking SoCal motorists with a metal pole in multiple incidents, two of which were captured on video. He was released 212 days early for good behavior, a decision Allred and her clients criticized at the time.
'I believe [the Hawaii] incidents were a foreseeable consequence of a system that repeatedly failed to address his pattern of violence and his pattern of behavior,' said Vivian Romero, one of Radimak's prior victims.
Allred claims former District Attorney George Gascon did not consult with her or the victims before the plea agreement, and they were not given the opportunity to speak at Radimak's sentencing, allegedly violating Marsy's Law.
Marsy's Law, named after UC Santa Barbara student Marsy Nicholas, who was murdered by her ex-boyfriend in 1983, was approved by California voters in 2008. It ensures victims and their families are involved in each step of the criminal justice process.
California road rage driver assaulted behind bars following Hawaii arrest
'It is sickening that Nathaniel Radimak, after being released from prison early, has appeared to violate his parole,' said Beth Lamprecht, another victim. 'There was every reason to doubt any chance of reform for this repeat offender. His return to violence underscores that he has not been willing to control his actions.'
Radimak's Hawaii case took an unusual twist when he was beaten by fellow inmates on May 12 while awaiting arraignment on the new charges. He suffered injuries to his face and torso and required hospitalization.
'I personally, as a lawyer, cannot say that vigilante justice should be inflicted, even if the actual justice system has failed the victims,' Allred remarked. 'Now, people may feel differently, but that's my statement as a lawyer.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
6 hours ago
- Business Insider
Tesla (TSLA) Ordered to Pay $242.5M after Fatal Autopilot Accident
A Miami jury has ruled that EV maker Tesla (TSLA) is partly responsible for a 2019 crash that involved its Autopilot system, and ordered the company to pay $242.5 million in damages to the family of the victim and an injured survivor. The award includes $42.5 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages, which was below the $345 million sought by the plaintiffs. The case was heard in the Southern District of Florida and began on July 14. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. The lawsuit focused on a fatal accident in Key Largo, Florida, where Tesla owner George McGee was driving his Model S with Enhanced Autopilot engaged. McGee dropped his phone and reached down to retrieve it, believing the system would automatically brake for obstacles. Instead, the vehicle accelerated through an intersection at more than 60 mph, crashing into a parked car and striking its owners, 22-year-old Naibel Benavides and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. Benavides died at the scene, while Angulo suffered multiple broken bones, a traumatic brain injury, and lasting psychological harm. Plaintiffs' attorney Brett Schreiber argued that Tesla marketed Autopilot as safer than human drivers and failed to limit its use to highways, which effectively turned public roads into test tracks. Interestingly, the verdict comes as Tesla CEO Elon Musk works to convince investors that the company's autonomous driving technology is safe and has the potential for robotaxi fleets. Despite the news, Tesla shares fell only slightly on Friday and are down 25% year-to-date. What Is the Prediction for Tesla Stock? Turning to Wall Street, analysts have a Hold consensus rating on TSLA stock based on 14 Buys, 15 Holds, and eight Sells assigned in the past three months, as indicated by the graphic below. Furthermore, the average TSLA price target of $310.84 per share implies 2.8% upside potential.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Jury awards over $240 million in damages against Tesla in Autopilot crash lawsuit
A Florida jury on Friday ordered Tesla to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to the victims of a 2019 fatal crash involving its Autopilot driver assist technology. The verdict which comes after a four-year long case could encourage more legal action against Elon Musk's electric car company. A Miami jury decided that Elon Musk's car company Tesla was partly responsible for a deadly crash in Florida involving its Autopilot driver assist technology and must pay the victims more than $240 million in damages. The federal jury held that Tesla bore significant responsibility because its technology failed and that not all the blame can be put on a reckless driver, even one who admitted he was distracted by his cellphone before hitting a young couple out gazing at the stars. The decision comes as Musk seeks to convince Americans his cars are safe enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service in several cities in the coming months. The decision ends a four-year long case remarkable not just in its outcome but that it even made it to trial. Many similar cases against Tesla have been dismissed and, when that didn't happen, settled by the company to avoid the spotlight of a trial. 'This will open the floodgates,' said Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in the Tesla case. 'It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.' The case also included startling charges by lawyers for the family of the deceased, 22-year-old, Naibel Benavides Leon, and for her injured boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. They claimed Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. Tesla said it made a mistake after being shown the evidence and honestly hadn't thought it was there. 'We finally learned what happened that night, that the car was actually defective,' said Benavides' sister, Neima Benavides. 'Justice was achieved.' Tesla has previously faced criticism that it is slow to cough up crucial data by relatives of other victims in Tesla crashes, accusations that the car company has denied. In this case, the plaintiffs showed Tesla had the evidence all along, despite its repeated denials, by hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up. 'Today's verdict is wrong," Tesla said in a statement, 'and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement lifesaving technology,' They said the plaintiffs concocted a story 'blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.' In addition to a punitive award of $200 million, the jury said Tesla must also pay $43 million of a total $129 million in compensatory damages for the crash, bringing the total borne by the company to $243 million. 'It's a big number that will send shock waves to others in the industry,' said financial analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. 'It's not a good day for Tesla.' Tesla said it will appeal. Even if that fails, the company says it will end up paying far less than what the jury decided because of a pre-trial agreement that limits punitive damages to three times Tesla's compensatory damages. Translation: $172 million, not $243 million. But the plaintiff says their deal was based on a multiple of all compensatory damages, not just Tesla's, and the figure the jury awarded is the one the company will have to pay. It's not clear how much of a hit to Tesla's reputation for safety the verdict in the Miami case will make. Tesla has vastly improved its technology since the crash on a dark, rural road in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019. But the issue of trust generally in the company came up several times in the case, including in closing arguments Thursday. The plaintiffs' lead lawyer, Brett Schreiber, said Tesla's decision to even use the term Autopilot showed it was willing to mislead people and take big risks with their lives because the system only helps drivers with lane changes, slowing a car and other tasks, falling far short of driving the car itself. Schreiber said other automakers use terms like 'driver assist' and 'copilot' to make sure drivers don't rely too much on the technology. 'Words matter,' Schreiber said. 'And if someone is playing fast and lose with words, they're playing fast and lose with information and facts.' Schreiber acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, was negligent when he blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a T-intersection at 62 miles an hour before slamming into a Chevrolet Tahoe that the couple had parked to get a look at the stars. The Tahoe spun around so hard it was able to launch Benavides 75 feet through the air into nearby woods where her body was later found. It also left Angulo, who walked into the courtroom Friday with a limp and cushion to sit on, with broken bones and a traumatic brain injury. But Schreiber said Tesla was at fault nonetheless. He said Tesla allowed drivers to act recklessly by not disengaging the Autopilot as soon as they begin to show signs of distraction and by allowing them to use the system on smaller roads that it was not designed for, like the one McGee was driving on. 'I trusted the technology too much,' said McGee at one point in his testimony. 'I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.' The lead defense lawyer in the Miami case, Joel Smith, countered that Tesla warns drivers that they must keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel yet McGee chose not to do that while he looked for a dropped cellphone, adding to the danger by speeding. Noting that McGee had gone through the same intersection 30 or 40 times previously and hadn't crashed during any of those trips, Smith said that isolated the cause to one thing alone: 'The cause is that he dropped his cellphone.' The auto industry has been watching the case closely because a finding of Tesla liability despite a driver's admission of reckless behavior would pose significant legal risks for every company as they develop cars that increasingly drive themselves. (FRANCE 24 with AP)
CNET
15 hours ago
- CNET
Tesla to Pay $243M After Jury Finds It Partly Liable for Fatal Autopilot Crash
Table of Contents Tesla to Pay $243M After Jury Finds It Partly Liable for Fatal Autopilot Crash A federal jury in Florida has found Tesla to be partly liable for a fatal car crash that occurred in 2019 involving its self-driving feature Autopilot. Elon Musk's electric vehicle company must now pay $243 million in damages as a result of the judgment, multiple reports Friday said. Prosecutors filed charges back in 2022 alleging that the driver didn't brake in time when approaching a T-intersection while driving his Tesla Model S with Autopilot active, and as a result killed two passengers in the car he collided with. A Tesla spokesperson told TechCrunch Friday that the verdict is "wrong" and will "set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology." Tesla plans to appeal, according to the statement. Tesla didn't immediately respond to CNET's request for comment. In California, Tesla is currently in the courts for another case involving Autopilot, where the state DMV is suing for allegations of false advertising and misleading customers. The California DMV alleges that Tesla is misrepresenting the capabilities of its advanced driver assistance systems by naming them "Full Self-Driving" and "Autopilot," and is seeking a 30-day suspension of Tesla's license to sell vehicles in the state.
