I agree with the need for personal responsibility. I've always advised my college age kids that the first defense is to not get too drunk that they're not in control but that, as a back up, they should still be around friends who will protect them. That even if they're using a service like Uber, they still need to have someone to remain the designated reasonably sober friend.
And this is not victim blaming. The victims of these kind of assaults should not be blamed. They got drunk and didn't have backup. It happens. But the question here is whether a third party who did not commit the assault should be held liable for something that an unrelated criminal did.
I suspect the plaintiffs' argument will be that Uber advertises itself as a service for people who are too drunk to drive, so it's on notice that a certain percentage of potential customers will be drunk, perhaps too intoxicated to check to see if the right car has pulled up. Uber is also on notice that criminals may take advantage of this. So does Uber have an obligation to do something more, given how it caters to this type of customer? I'm curious if there's anything additional technologically that Uber could do.
Yes, on personal responsibility, and having some level of awareness on the part of the passenger.
But there is a technology-related step Uber can take. Their scheduling software/app knows to connect rider and driver/car. Shouldn't be difficult to also know if a connection has not
been made and a missed connection could trigger a text or other alert to the rider. Maybe if she got this, she would've realized she's in the wrong car, before it's too late.