Why are Waymo marketing folks doing their safety analysis? They simply cannot seem to provide unbiased reporting of facts.
Pedestrian blamed
Waymo stated “pedestrian suddenly entered the roadway” , implying that the pedestrian was fully at fault. The press of course picked this up as the pedestrian “ran” in front of the car. But is key to note that the pedestrian started in the roadway, being dropped off from a vehicle. And this crash occurred immediately next to an elementary school where kids are expected to be around.
It was a legal crossing
Waymo stating that the child suddenly entered the roadway was an attempt to blame the child for crossing illegally mid-block. This is the same as using the term “jay-walking” which was created specifically to blame pedestrians for crashes by associating them with supposed country bumpkins who don’t know any better (“jay” was a pejorative for country folks).
But California Assembly Bill AB2147 from 2022, also known as the Freedom to Walk Act, was passed to clarify that pedestrians do have the right to cross certain roadways mid-block. Specifically, the California Vehicle code was clarified to state that pedestrians are only disallowed to cross mid-block if the adjacent intersections are controlled by traffic lights. But 24th St, where the crash occurred, has stop signs instead of traffic signals at each end. This is specifically the type of situation where AB2147 was trying to allow mid-block crossings.
CA Vehicle Code 21955 (as per AB2417)
Was the passenger dropped off an unaccompanied child?
It is well known that Waymo is not allowed to carry unaccompanied children yet often does and does nothing to prevent the situation. The California PUC is already investigating this practice. And now a Waymo has collided with a child because it just dropped off someone at an elementary school. If the drop off was of an unaccompanied child then Waymo can be considered 100% liable for hitting the child. Therefore this is a germane issue, and it should be investigated by the NTSB.
Waymo was not providing service at the time
The Waymo vehicle was empty at the time. We used to be concerned about Single Occupancy Vehicles generating lots of miles. But now we have Zero Occupancy Vehicles, hitting children. Waymo vehicles drive twice as many miles because half the time they are driving around empty. This means they cause twice as many crashes.
Determination of Fault
For many collisions fault must be decided by the legal system. I cannot and do not claim that Waymo is 100% at fault. But Waymo is clearly trying to disseminate information trying to put the fault onto the child who was hit by the vehicle. Instead, they should be determining how to make our streets safer for all.
NTSB report:
Automated Driving System-Equipped Vehicle Collision with Student Pedestrian
What Happened
This information is preliminary and subject to change.
Release Date 3 March 2026
On January 23, 2026, about 8:30 a.m. pacific standard time, a 2024 Jaguar I-Pace sport utility vehicle, equipped with an automated driving system (ADS) and operated by Waymo LLC, struck a 9-year-old student pedestrian crossing midblock within a school zone in Santa Monica, Los Angeles County, California.[1]
The unoccupied vehicle had completed a passenger drop-off on eastbound Pearl Street at the stop sign in front of an elementary school, turned left onto 24th Street, and proceeded north (see figure). The crash occurred in a 25-mph speed limit school zone, approximately 40 feet north of the end of the adjacent 15-mph speed limit school zone. The weather was clear, the roadway was dry, and daylight conditions were present.
According to video evidence from a school surveillance camera and from cameras on the ADS-equipped vehicle, a queue of five vehicles had formed in the southbound lane of 24th Street at the stop-controlled intersection with Pearl Street. The student pedestrian exited the right rear door of the fifth vehicle in the queue. The pedestrian then moved toward the front of her vehicle and entered the roadway, crossing at a rapid pace between her vehicle and a Chevrolet Suburban sport utility vehicle stopped in front of her vehicle.
The ADS-equipped vehicle was traveling north on 24th Street at 17 mph. According to video evidence, the vehicle braked and collided with the student pedestrian near its front-right headlight assembly. Post-impact, the pedestrian fell, then walked to the east curb of 24th Street. The vehicle continued braking and came to rest within the northbound travel lane almost immediately.
After the collision, a Waymo remote assistance agent in Novi, Michigan, contacted 911 and later provided the vehicle with directions to move to the curb on 24th Street north of the crash site.[2] The vehicle remained at that location until the Santa Monica Police Department arrived. As a result of the collision, the student pedestrian reported minor injuries and did not require medical transport.
Parties to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation include:
- Santa Monica Police Department
- Waymo LLC
All aspects of the crash remain under investigation while the NTSB determines the probable cause, with the intent of issuing safety recommendations to prevent similar crashes.
In addition, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Office of Defect Investigations opened a preliminary evaluation of this crash on January 28, 2026 (PE26001).
[1] The vehicle was operated by Waymo’s 5th-generation ADS at the time of the crash. Waymo refers to this system as an SAE Level 4 highly automated system. As defined by SAE International, Level 4 automation allows a vehicle to handle all aspects of driving, monitoring, and safety-critical functions without human intervention, but only within specific, restricted geofenced areas or conditions. A driver is not required to take over, as the system is expected to manage failures and perform a safe stop autonomously. See SAE J3016_202104, “Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles,” April 2021.
[2] Remote assistance is information or advice provided to an ADS-equipped vehicle in driverless operation by a remotely located human. See SAE J3016_202104, “Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles,” April 2021.
