Nobody else has been named as being present at the time of the accident. No information has been forthcoming as to what time her vehicle was discovered in the pond, or who reported it. Nor has any time been given as to when she left the property she was visiting, and no speculation at to the time her car had gone into the pond. Rescue crews were at the scene, and recorded pulling her from the vehicle at 12:56 a.m. It has been reported that she drown from being submerged.
It was reported that she was in a remote area of the property, which which is part of a ranch "owned by a corporation connected to her husband, Jim Breyer." No reason has been given why she was even there at that time, or whatever time she first arrived at the property, or left. I doubt she'd have been on the property without having visited the house that is there. And no word who she met with at the home, or if anyone else was even there.
The whole thing has been pretty hushed-up. Sheriff's Department has said they do not want to release too much info due to their conducting what could be a criminal investigation.
"Since emergency services were there within say 10 minutes of the call, that would seem to suggest that Angela Chao made the call to them herself..."
If that's the case, why haven't they reported that?
I have my doubts of the car being filmed by someone going into the pond. As I said, the area where the pond is, has been reported to be in a remote area of the property.
Nobody is going to argue that it is all very strange and there is very little that has been formally released by the sheriff. Up until the news that this has been turned into a criminal investigation, there is nothing that I recall being released as to why they have not put the details out there. Does the fact it is a criminal investigation provide adequate explanation for the silence? Perhaps it does....
So the statement that she was there alone... that is somebody’s pure speculation and is not supported by anything. Ditto for the statement about the pond being on a ‘remote part of the property’. There is nothing that supports that. By the way, I’ve been following this case fairly closely and that is the first time I’ve heard that one. No information has been released as to which pond so anything about that is speculation.
“No reason has been given why she was even there... And no word who she met with at the home. Etc.” That’s very strange wording when referring to someone own home.... Why would that even be a question?
“I have my doubts of the car being filmed by someone going into the pond.” Again, more pure speculation... no one said anything about it ‘being filmed by someone’. What Kyle Bass said is that ‘there is video of it entering the pond’... he did not say anything about it ‘being filmed by someone’. There is a big difference... Rich people have lots of cameras and surveillance equipment and no doubt the Tesla itself has cameras. There may be other ways the video could have been taken as well.
It would be real helpful if folks just stuck to facts and when speculating, say it is speculation and what the evidence is for why speculating in a particular way....
Who are the major stockholders in this 'Corp.'?