Posted on 09/03/2026 10:17:40 PM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom
A Tesla Model Y turning left at an intersection collided with a pickup truck in Batavia, Illinois, killing a passenger in the Tesla — Maggie Espinosa, 37, a teacher and mother of five. It was reported as an ordinary intersection crash.
But Electrek was able to confirm that Tesla’s own report to federal regulators says the car’s driver-assist system was engaged as it made that turn. This is part of an ongoing Electrek investigation matching reported crashes to Tesla’s redacted NHTSA data.
Around 4:19 p.m. on March 25, 2026, a Tesla Model Y heading south on Randall Road tried to turn left onto McKee Street and struck a Dodge pickup traveling straight in the opposite direction, according to Batavia police. A Nissan SUV was also caught up in the crash. Espinosa, a front-seat passenger in the Tesla, died of her injuries. A former kindergarten teacher, she left behind five children, including 2-year-old twins; a GoFundMe for the family raised more than $100,000. The Tesla’s driver and two others were injured.
Under a NHTSA Standing General Order, automakers must report crashes where a Level 2 driver-assist system was engaged within 30 seconds of impact. Tesla filed a report on this crash — and it’s revealing. Tesla marks the automation “Engagement Status” as “Verified Engaged,” and lists the 2026 Model Y’s pre-crash movement as “Making Left Turn” at 24 mph, at an intersection. It says the Tesla struck the front of the pickup, which had the right of way going straight. And it confirms Tesla holds the event-data recorder, telematics, and video of the crash.
Then it redacts the parts that would explain it: the crash narrative, the software version, and whether the road was within the system’s approved operating area — all as “confidential business information.”
We’ve laid out the complete record below — everything Tesla disclosed, and everything it blacked out. [more at site]
This one points more directly at “Full Self-Driving” than the highway cases we’ve covered. An unprotected left turn across oncoming traffic at an intersection is a City-Streets maneuver — something FSD does, and something basic Autopilot cannot. Basic Autopilot is a highway lane-keeping system; it does not turn a car left onto a cross street. So a driver-assist car that was verified engaged while making a left turn was, in all likelihood, running FSD.
However, that doesn’t mean FSD was at fault in the crash, but we don’t know without all the data, and Tesla is the one gatekeeping it. It didn’t even want the public to know that FSD was active in the crash until we were able to connect the NHTSA report to the media and police reports about the crash.
A teacher and mother of five is dead, a county prosecutor is weighing whether anyone should be charged, and the single piece of evidence that would show what actually happened in that intersection—did the software make the turn, or the driver?—is sitting in Tesla’s servers.
Full Service Crash Assist or operator error...?
Seems like if FSD was engaged, a cross-lane movement should not have been allowed. Unless driver instruction (turning the steering wheel) overrides FSD.
Is there any reason to believe this web site?
There is a lot of anti-Elon crap out there.
Two weeks ago, we saw a guy sleeping in the driver’s seat of a Tesla, with the seat fully back. His eyes were partly covered. The car, seemingly sensing he was knocked out, drove and hit the brakes, more gently.
I believe everyone who drives in that mode is fully responsible for any accident that comes from it. If they die, so be it.
I just don’t want them hurting others. They can hurt themselves with the abandon they have when in that car mode, for all I care.
Sleeping suicides.
I’m going with “this is anti-Elon crap”.
They reviewed the police report and the Tesla report. The author wrote a non-sensational, factual report. Looks like good reporting to me.
I asked Grok about the site. Main complaint is it is too much Tesla fandom.
————
Electrek is a legitimate, high-traffic niche site for electric-vehicle and clean-energy news, but it is not a high-credibility general news source. Treat it as an enthusiast/advocacy outlet that is often first with details yet requires cross-checking, especially on Tesla.
Media Bias/Fact Check rates it Left-Center biased with Mostly Factual reporting and Medium credibility. It has no listed failed fact checks in that review, but the rating notes promotional content, selective framing, and limited critical coverage of problems in green tech. Other raters (Biasly, Ground News) similarly place it somewhat left with average-to-high factuality on its core beat.
Strengths
It is useful for timely product announcements, charging-network updates, policy snippets, and Tesla-specific details that slower outlets miss. The site is owned by Seth Weintraub (part of the 9to5 network) and edited by Fred Lambert; it has operated since 2012–2013 and generates revenue from ads, affiliates, and sponsored posts. Readers who follow EVs often find its volume and access valuable.
Limitations and controversies
The main credibility issues are advocacy and conflicts of interest:
• Coverage has long been strongly positive toward electric transportation and Tesla specifically. Automotive journalists at The Drive and The Truth About Cars criticized it as closer to fandom or unofficial communications than detached reporting.
• Writers and the owner previously disclosed Tesla stock holdings and earned substantial sums from Tesla referral codes (a point of public controversy around 2017). Weintraub said he largely divested Tesla stock in 2020; later comments from Lambert indicated personal Tesla holdings remained relevant to some observers. Wikipedia editors have repeatedly treated Electrek as a poor source for Tesla-related claims precisely because of these conflicts.
• Articles sometimes mix news, opinion, and promotions. Isolated reader complaints have also flagged undisclosed AI-generated images.
It is not fabricated-news or a scam site, and it is frequently cited for basic facts. It is simply not independent or even-handed on the topics it cares about most.
Practical use
Use Electrek for breaking EV news and then verify important claims against primary sources, regulatory filings, or less invested outlets (Reuters, AP, established automotive publications). Its value is highest when you already understand its slant; it is lowest when you need an impartial picture of Tesla quality, competition, or policy trade-offs.
Perhaps. I am not "anti-Elon" but I am "anti-self driving cars" for reasons like this accident. Also for the information they collect about us which this article exposes...
must report crashes where a Level 2 driver-assist system was engaged within 30 seconds of impact.
They know in real time where you are, what you are doing, have video of it, etc. and are monitoring it. No privacy at all.
"Tesla holds the event-data recorder, telematics, and video of the crash."
This must mean they own all that data if they already have it. Telematics give them GPS location, speed, driver behavior, and anything else they want to record/monitor, in real time.
I don't want anyone, not even Elon, to know and store that much information about me for any reason. This is exactly why people are fighting the flock cameras.
I do not understand the “need” to have self driving or “hands free” driving cars, especially on the highway at speeds.
In our own neighborhood last Sunday, my wife and I were driving to church. As we were driving toward an intersection, I saw a vehicle not slowing to stop as posted on the cross street. The woman driving appeared distracted and driving too fast. She was going to (and DID) fly through the intersection. I had to slam on the brakes to avoid being T-boned on my side (LEFT) as I was driving. She never noticed our vehicle.
This event required an instant reaction and I cannot imagine a self-driving vehicle reacting fast enough. I would never rely upon such a feature.
We recently changed to Allstate for car insurance. To keep our discount, they want me to turn MY phone with MY mobile data plan into a telematics system using THEIR app to monitor my driving! It measures speed, acceleration, deceleration, cornering, braking, speed and location. You have to use it for FIFTY trips so they can build your profile. You get a bad score if you exceed 10 mph over the posted limit. Details of their algorithm to score me are not disclosed. Our agent doesn’t even know how they score customers.
It really hacked me off when they started nagging me to get their app and have them spy on me. I’ll probably lose some discount because I said “Hell no!”
Most cars keep a record of what was going on. There was a murder case where some guy had a medium sized tractor he used around the house. They got detailed information on how many times the gears had gone in reverse and then forward and reversed, etc. IIRC he used it to move his wife.
Then they were able to track the times he used the blinkers on his truck, left and right and time intervals. That information didn’t track with his statements.
Not GPS, not phone data, just information in the little modules of half-way modern cars. The case is probably 2 years old now, and his truck was a couple of years old at the time iirc.
I witnessed a car crash. Car destroyed, everyone was fine. Her car had already contacted the police and her husband.
Did she have the female voice turned on?
I was walking on a street a few months ago (country road, no sidewalk just berm/shoulder) and a car was coming toward me. I thought it was too close, so I threw out my hand pointing right telling driver to move away. The car was a Tesla and instantly swerved away from me. It was amazing.
Fully autonomous vehicles are coming. They will be a massive increase in productivity imaginable.
For those that worry about being tracked, if you have your mobile phone with you, then you are already tracked. Don’t try to tell me that you leave it at home.
Tesla’s FSD is already safer than human drivers. Yes, it will make mistakes, but far fewer than human drivers.
We are reaching the point where allowing humans to drive is more dangerous than allowing autonomous vehicles. If we could eliminate the deaths of tens of thousands, how can you oppose that?
The driver manually turning the steering wheel in a 2026 Tesla will immediately override and disengage the FSD, allowing the manual turn.
That's your choice. I don't carry mine. And my FJ doesn't have GPS.
“Don’t try to tell me that you leave it at home.”
I don’t. But putting a phone in a Faraday bag is far easier than putting an entire car in.
CC
FSD would disengage if an override like that occurred and the report would likely indicate that it was engaged but overridden before the crash.
>>I do not understand the “need” to have self driving or “hands free” driving cars, especially on the highway at speeds.
Statistically speaking, FSD is safer than an average driver...problem is, everyone thinks they are an above average driver.
I have never driven in, nor been a passenger in a FSD - but imo, it won’t be long until almost every car on the road will be FSD - even those people that insist that they will never own one, will be forced into it because buying insurance for a self-drive car will become prohibitively expensive (so government wont mandate it directly, but insurance companies will force it to happen) - so only the very wealthy will be willing to pay the premium....not saying it is good thing, but I think it is inevitable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.