“What evidence of hacking would you expect to survive the explosion, fire and crash?
What evidence would you expect the government to find?”
One would have to assume that evidence existed in the first place in order to answer those questions, which I will not. You don’t assume an outlandish possibility happened, without evidence, and then make excuses as to why you can’t produce the evidence. Instead, one should assume the outlandish possibility did not happen until evidence can be produced to the contrary.
MOM.
Motive
Opportunity
Means
Pray tell, how would you prove it was hacked? You can’t. If there was a hack, it more than likely was not stored in the non-volatile memory of the car systems impacted by the hack. You can verify this yourself, if you have the technical know how.
So in this case, if you could get it to jury trial, it would have to be about the circumstances surrounding what happened.
Many crimes have no *direct evidence*, and yet someone gets convicted. That is why we have juries.
I would love this sent to trial, but no one knows who to prosecute.