WWTBAM Bored

The Kalamazoo Uber driver/killer has stated an interesting logic. The devil made him do it.

That is, the Uber App on his phone sent him satanic messages, and that was why he did the killing.

http://nypost.com/2016/03/14/killer-dri ... ough-uber/

OK, insanity plea officially in place.

BTW -- for our Bored Lawyers: one of the big ongoing battles between Uber and some of their drivers is the independent-contractor-vs-employee thing. What is Uber's liability on these killings (or, for that matter, even a garden-variety traffic accident) between the two? My ancient remembrance of the laws of agency might imply that they might be liable even if it's an IC relationship, but that seems to be the shield that gets invoked to blow off problems in other areas.

If I put a sign on my car offering rides for pay, I'd be arrested. If Uber sends people to get rides from a murderer, they'll try like hell to wriggle out of any responsibility.

The ride boards (physical cork boards in those pre-internet days) at colleges shut down at some point because they didn't want complicity if any crime occurred involving people who'd met through the board. And the colleges made no profit on them.

ghostjmf wrote:If I put a sign on my car offering rides for pay, I'd be arrested. If Uber sends people to get rides from a murderer, they'll try like hell to wriggle out of any responsibility.

The ride boards (physical cork boards in those pre-internet days) at colleges shut down at some point because they didn't want complicity if any crime occurred involving people who'd met through the board. And the colleges made no profit on them.

Dalton didn't shoot anybody he met through Uber. Unless you believe that the Devil made him do it, Uber had nothing to do with his crimes.

Thanks. I always remember an argument I had with a boss (I didn't work for him very long, for a variety of reasons) over an employee that had racked up a lot of speeding tickets, and it was quite the wonder he wasn't on a license suspension. Part of his job involved a lot of driving (salesman type, very good at it) using a company car.

Anyway, when I was reworking the insurance for the company, they pulled all of the drivers records, and they basically said they weren't going to cover this guy because of his record. Not no way. Not no how.

The boss's approach was "that's ok, we'll just let him drive his own car and pay him for mileage."



"No! No! No!" I said to the boss (who never took kindly to being told "no," which is why I wasn't there very long). As long as he was driving for company business, we would be on the hook for anything that happened as a result of his driving (barring the classic "frolic of his own" defense or such). If the insurance company wouldn't cover him driving one of our cars, they sure wouldn't cover the company for anything he did in his own car on company business, and we'd be on the hook.

Obviously, I wasn't there long enough to find how it played out.

Uber provides insurance for its drivers while on duty. They might as well, because Uber knows that if there's an accident, they'll be sued too. And we don't have to tell our own insurance companies that we drive for Uber.

jarnon: I realize the killer didn't kill his passengers. He killed people in between taking fares. And drove very recklessly with his passengers, one says.

If Uber actually "made him do it", I guess we'll want to know from him why it didn't want him to kill the fares too.

I finally read the article. So the devil can't communicate with the colorblind? All we have to do to protect ourselves from becoming the victims of the victims of satanic possesion is surround ourselves with the colorblind? I'm confused. A little.

Oh, OK, the evil Uber insignia changing from black to red *stopped* him. Now I understand.