Another "coincidence" in this case IMO is where they found her vehicle. People have understandably gone to great lengths to try to explain how Kiely may have been heavily intoxicated, taken (multiple?) wrong turns, navigated "road(s)" that are actually ATV trails that may even be worse than some of the surrounding terrain, etc. That's not unexpected and I'm not insisting that scenario is impossible, but perhaps consider the scenario that someone else put that vehicle in the water:
Let's suppose Kiely was already dead or seriously incapacitated and considered close to death before her car went into the water. Let's further suppose that someone (or a couple/few people) were either directly responsible for her death/incapacitation or believed they had enough potential criminal liability for her death (or death in the near future) that they decided the best solution was to place Kiely in her vehicle (or she was already in the vehicle) and dispose of the vehicle.
Consider the general areas that we believe Kiely may have parked, the location of the party, the location of the other party in the area. It also helps to look at a larger map of the whole lake and/or the areas surrounding the areas described in my previous sentence.
What would be the most important qualities of a spot to dispose of the vehicle? I would suppose at least some of those would be:
1. Time: One would want to dispose of the vehicle quickly. The more quickly it's in the water, the less likely someone sees the vehicle, the less likely someone sees the people involved with the vehicle and/or the people in an unusual area, and the less time one has to fill with some sort of fake alibi.
2. Hiding the Disposal: One would want to pick a location and route to that location that minimized visual identification of the vehicle (in possession of that person/those people or in a conspicuous location) whether by individuals at the party or another party in that area, or from residents/campers in the surrounding area (e.g., homes along the lake), or from camera (whether phone cameras or surveillance cameras).
3. Distance: Distance may not be that important in and of itself, but it affects #1 (Time) and #2 (Hiding the Disposal).
4. Likelihood of Quick/Eventual Discovery: Obviously if the vehicle is never discovered, then the perpetrators would get away with their crime(s). If it is discovered, the longer it takes to do so, the more evidence may be deteriorated and/or contaminated.
5. Ease of Disposal: If the vehicle was driven into the water, this wouldn't be much of a factor at many sites, but that would seem to also be complicated by the necessity of the driver escaping the vehicle after driving it into the water. If the vehicle was pushed/rolled into the water, then one would prefer a slope to give the vehicle much-needed momentum to assist in disposing of the vehicle farther from shore and in deeper water.
So given such parameters, what would be an ideal disposal site?
A. Anything on land is much more likely to be discovered and there don't seem to be any suitable areas in that immediate vicinity, so that would also bring time into play as well.
B. Leaving the campground, perhaps to go to another lake in the region, is going to take much more time, risk visual identification of the vehicle, and risk the chance of the vehicle being seen on a camera (whether on the way to the highway, on the highway(s), from businesses/residences along the route, etc.).
C. Other than the boat launch/ramp and the area that the vehicle was actually found, the rest of the lake would require a much longer and a very convoluted route and/or extensive driving along the shore that would leave tons of tracks. So that would take more time, more distance, and possibly even more evidence (both tons of tracks and much more possibility of being seen by persons and/or cameras) for most likely marginal benefits at most.
So that would seem to limit the best options to the area of the boat launch, wrapping around to the western shores of the southern/southeastern arm of the reservoir where the vehicle was found. Using the boat launch has one large obvious advantage, a paved road (for at least most of the way?) that wouldn't leave nearly as many/good of tracks, and would allow a straighter, faster push/drive of the vehicle into the water. That one large advantage appears to be offset by various substantial disadvantages: It would require driving past a couple of campgrounds and a parking lot (presumably for at least one of those campgrounds), once to shore it seems visible by the entirety of the areas surrounding the main lake, and it's an area of much, much higher future activity such as boating, diving, swimming, fishing, etc. (risking discovery of the vehicle or some other piece of evidence from the vehicle, etc.).
So the best area seems to be on the western shore of the S/SE arm of the lake. The northern half of that shoreline has one or both campgrounds in close proximity and many trees to contend with after any nearby "road" ends (risking hitting tree while driving/pushing vehicle and preventing a lengthier run-up to the reservoir). On the southern half of that shoreline, one would expect the deepest part to be right around where her vehicle was found. Just another strange coincidence in a very strange case.
