Diver convicted in wife's drowning

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Rhoneman you spelled "fried" wrong.



AD I never said I know everything, that's your quote.

I have an advantage over you in that I am not biased by having known the guilty party. I come into this thread objective, and I clearly see a man who has murdered his wife, he has motive, he had opportunity, and the odds of everything that has been presented in this case happening in any other scenario other than the murder for which he has been tried and convicted are about as good as an asteroid striking this planet.

You and Sadie can continue to refute the overwhelming evidence and debate the overwhelming majority of posters on this thread who are pointing the finger of blame, in a futile attempt to convince them to see it your way, but David will continue to sit in his jail cell and there's very little chance he will ever see the light of day.

You may not have come in biased, but you've certainly formed an unshakable opinion based upon a subset of the total data, unless someone believes we have viewed 100% of the available evidence? I don't know anyone involved, I just believe that things happen and I am willing to be persuaded. So far, I would say that there is quite a lot of conjecture that leads to the belief that David killed his wife. That's not the same as proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

You are also showing a bit of a vindictive streak that I find disconcerting in a case that isn't all that clear cut. There was a strong enough case to convict, but there is certainly the possibility of doubt. Some consider it reasonable doubt while others feel it would be a stretch to believe that anything other than a murder occurred. I still believe that there are possible, though unlikely, explanations for Shelley's death that don't involve murder.

Even though I can live with a guilty verdict standing against this man, I have a hard time with a 25 year sentence and certainly would find the concept of death penalty application to be outrageous. Your "fried" comment, therefore, is not funny and in very poor taste. Some might call it offensive. Of course, guilty is guilty and it's a tough call if you start letting the judge alter sentencing too much based upon how close the trial was. I'm sure many people would be up in arms if a man convicted of murder was sentenced to ten years.

Here you have a man who may have murdered his wife ten years ago. To the best of anyone's knowledge, he hasn't been on a crime spree since then. While I don't want to see him get off completely free if he did it, he's looking pretty old and beaten down already. Does anyone believe he would be a danger to society if he got out in five or ten years on a lesser charge? The parallels to the Watson case are pretty significant and, in my opinion, the case against Watson was stronger than what we have here.
 
Even though I can live with a guilty verdict standing against this man, I have a hard time with a 25 year sentence and certainly would find the concept of death penalty application to be outrageous. Your "fried" comment, therefore, is not funny and in very poor taste. Some might call it offensive.

Yeah, it might be offensive to some to suggest that a guy who has been convicted of murdering his wife be put to death. But not to me.

Does anyone believe he would be a danger to society if he got out in five or ten years on a lesser charge?

Whether Swain, or any other convict would be a danger should they be released from prison, is for the most part irrelevant. It's about punishment for the crime, not keeping the dangerous off the street.

The parallels to the Watson case are pretty significant and, in my opinion, the case against Watson was stronger than what we have here.

So?

You've got two murders, two dead wives, and two guilty men. Yeah, one got 18 months and the other up to 30 years. The only point here is that judges are inconsistent, arbitrary, and unfair.

That's probably not news to anyone.
 
idocsteve, the modern day Isaac Parks...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Parker

I don't know if Swain's guilty or not. I've only seen some of the evidence, but this hardly seems like a slam dunk case. And to suggest he be "fried" for it seems a little bit much. I've seen what happens to a person in most methods of capital punishment, and it ain't pretty. I'm not against capital punishment, I'm just not fond of getting the wrong guy. I would advise against going for the coup de grace yet. I'm not really fond of prison, either, but I wouldn't want to walk the streets with some of the criminals I've met.

I just think that calling for someone's head in a case that is this "gray" serves no one, not the public, or justice. I don't know, (and I'm not that optimistic) that this will be ruled an accident on appeal. I just think that the case had poor evidence, and also could have been handled better. I have just seen too many cases where the court has convicted the wrong person in a case. Here's some good reading for you. I used to live in OK, and have spent quite a bit of time in the town this book's about.

The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Eric
 
Egad - I've read "The Innocent Man" and yes, this was a very good book. It was the most henious of cases involving prosecutorial misconduct ever recorded. The prosecutor fabricated evidence, solicited false witness testimony, ignored and covered-up esculpatory evidence. However, I have not seen any of that that in the Swain case. There have been charges of corruption of the BVI prosecution on this board, but as far as can tell, that corruption charge was levied because of the fact that the case was prosecuted at all. BVI authorities left themselves a loophole by ruling of accident "unless proven otherwise." Which indicates to me a certain level of laziness, lack of funds or inexperience to conduct a proper initial investigation, rather than corruption. I would say that we would all agree that the efforts of Shelley's parents and their lawyer to investigate, at great cost to them, led to BVI finally prosecuting the case. But, there would be a split in opinion as to whether that constitutes corruption on the part of BVI authorities, or finally having a day in court for justice for Shelley.

There have also been charges that Shelley's parents' lawyer approached them because he had some sort of personal vendetta against Swain and that he is some sort of blood-thirsty, ambulance-chasing shiester lawyer. Below is the link to the story of how he came to represent Shelley's parents in the matter. Short story is Shelley's parents felt right from the start that there was something wrong with Swain's story, long before they met the lawyer who would represent them:

From Tortola to R.I., one man’s hunt for a suspected killer | Rhode Island news | projo.com | The Providence Journal
 
Some interesting facts in that linked article

"Swain filed for a new trial on numerous grounds, including his assertion that Olenn’s evidence didn’t justify the verdict. His argument prompted Judge Hurst to analyze the evidence for the record. “The only reasonable conclusion was that this was a homicide,” the judge said in denying the request for a new trial. “I’m satisfied I would have reached the same verdict as the jury.”

"And if there were discrepancies in his taped depositions, which the jury heard, Swain said they could have easily been cleared up if Olenn had called him as a witness.

Swain didn’t tell the jury he had fought Olenn’s attempt to put him on the stand."

"Swain also raised the possibility that Shelley’s diving equipment degraded over time to explain its broken condition." (He suggests that the broken snorkel, mask, and missing slate was due to "degradation")
 
Many thanks to K-girl for getting me a copy of the Dateline piece. I got a chance to watch it yesterday and now that I've finally seen it, I do think that it was pretty fair and balanced - far more so than any of the media coverage to date. Thank you very much for getting that to me, K-girl.

In regard to your story from above, K-girl - notice the date of the article. January 6, 2008. Ten months before a criminal trial was held. Ten months before David was convicted of any crime - at a time when he was supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, he'd already been tried and convicted in the courts of public opinion and the media - and, in fact, long, long before that. Read the article again without a predetermined opinion of his guilt and see if you have an opinion about his guilt when you're done. My guess is that you will.

You'll also read in the article, "Lisa Tyre would say later that from the moment of David Swain’s phone call, she blamed him for her daughter’s death. Not that she entertained any notion then that he had killed her — 'nobody I know kills people' — but that his absence at her time of need made him responsible." The Tyres did not believe that David murdered Shelley until Olenn came up with a murder theory while diving the Twin Wrecks in Tortola (at the Tyres expense). It took 2 years for Olenn to convince the Tyres to sue David in civil court after he told them his theory, according to the article.

Do I believe that Olenn smelled money and PR? Yes, I do. Look at this pretty little puff piece done by the only newpaper of note in the state, lionizing him. This isn't news - this is PR.
 
Well, I think we all question the validity of the gas math that was presented to provide a time of death. If the prosecution was aware of how shaky the science behind their eight minute assertion was, then presenting it as fact is the closest thing I see to misconduct in the criminal trial. That assumes that the in-court presentation mirrors what we saw here.

Now, all the "facts" in the article come from the Tyre's side of the civil trial. The judge in question was the RI judge for the civil trial. The allowable set of facts and presentation in Tortola could very well have been different.

Also, I believe Olenn's statement about RI not having jurisdiction was false. This was all covered in the Watson case discussion. A murder case involving a victim and alleged killer who are both US citizens can be prosecuted in the US. RI would have a solid case as the venue for such a prosecution. I doubt it would have changed anything to exclude the statement, and this wasn't a DA representing The People to lock a man up.
 
Sadiesmom - I don't think you know me quite as well as you perceive. I've been saying for quite some time that I want to see Swain have a vigorous defense and I would have hoped for that in the civil trial. However, I do believe that the judge gave Swain every opportunity to put on a vigorous defense. Swain's attorney's illness was not a last-minute situation that occurred just before the civil trial:

"..For years the [civil] trial was delayed, in part because of Swain's numerous requests for continuances, noting that his lawyer had developed cancer. The Superior Court judge hearing the case, Patricia Hurst, repeatedly advised Swain to find another lawyer while granting most of his requests. Eventually, however, the case went forward without Swain having representation.."

Source: CDNN :: Friends, Family Rally to Support Scuba Murder Suspect David Swain

Shelley's parents also said this:

"And Tyre’s parents, Richard and Lisa Trye of Jamestown, reconstructed from the stand the “volatile” and frustrating day they attempted to get answers from Swain about what happened to their daughter.

“May I use the word cocky?” Lisa Tyre said when asked by Olenn to describe Swain’s demeanor that morning. “He was very arrogant. It was his tone, his general demeanor.” As if: “‘I know about everything and that’s what it is.."

Source: On tape, Swain says CPR wouldn’t have saved wife Wrongful Death Attorneys

From the same article you quoted above:

"Lisa Tyre recalled Swain’s exact words: “Shelley isn’t with us. … I went down with five and I came back with four.”

She told Olenn, coincidentally a diver himself, that she initially thought David was saying Shelley had traveled to another island. Then David made some bizarre remark about giving the man who found Shelley a grade of B-plus in lifesaving skills.
That’s when Lisa handed the phone to her husband. Together they deciphered David Swain’s message. He didn’t know how Shelley died, he said. He wasn’t with her. He had gone off by himself to take pictures. He didn’t know what happened, he kept repeating, he hadn’t been with her.."

Source: From Tortola to R.I., one man’s hunt for a suspected killer | Rhode Island news | projo.com | The Providence Journal

You notice that David appears to have blamed Thwaites for what happened to Shelley in the bold text above, which indicates two things to me: 1) that he thought there actually might have been a chance to save Shelley; and 2) that he takes no blame himself, whatsoever, even though he is the one who supposedly did CPR and stopped Thwaites or Royale from doing CPR.

About Olenn - I would say some people would see it like you do. However, some people will see it this way: murder-by-scuba is not a case that is necessarily great PR for future cases. It was a case where ultimately, even though there was a judgement against David, there was no money to be had. They knew that from the financial forensic analysis that David had already blown through all the money and was once again, bankrupt. Shelley's parents knew that they would be on the hook for money, but wanted to press forward anyway. The fact that Olenn won a landmark case that caused diving boards to disappear from hotels and backyards across the country, tells you that his winnings from a case like that were substantial, probably in the millions. Does he need a vacation to Tortola from the Swains? I would venture to guess not. Compared to the kind of cases he could attract with the potential winnings with his background, he did not need this case. Yet, he devoted 8 years of his time to this case. Did this case bring him millions as the previous case would have? In fact, the same article above says:

"Olenn had volunteered to help the Tyres at his own expense. He didn’t expect it would become such a commitment.."

So what does that really say about this man? I would say, not the bad things you are trying to portray.
 
My apologies, K-girl - I know that my last post read as though the whole thing was directed towards you personally - actually the only part that was was the first paragraph of thanks. The rest of the post was meant as a figurative "you," rather than literally to you...my apologies as it was not in the least clear.

Sadiesmom - I don't think you know me quite as well as you perceive. I've been saying for quite some time that I want to see Swain have a vigorous defense and I would have hoped for that in the civil trial. However, I do believe that the judge gave Swain every opportunity to put on a vigorous defense. Swain's attorney's illness was not a last-minute situation that occurred just before the civil trial:

"..For years the [civil] trial was delayed, in part because of Swain's numerous requests for continuances, noting that his lawyer had developed cancer. The Superior Court judge hearing the case, Patricia Hurst, repeatedly advised Swain to find another lawyer while granting most of his requests. Eventually, however, the case went forward without Swain having representation.."

The reasons behind this whole thing were something that had confused the heck out of me at the time of the civil trial and I did ask some folks who are closer to David than I am why this was so. This was answer I got (and that I tend to believe to be the case - although I'm still confused by the timing of some of it). Apparently there were 2 attorneys involved in David's civil case at 2 different times, both of whom had to leave the case. The first (I think) was a female attorney who became pregnant and had to get off the case because of that (I don't know if she had problems with her pregnancy or whether she was imminently due to give birth). The other attorney was the one mentioned who developed cancer during the course of the case. David is not someone who is given to trusting easily (as I think we've established in the discussions on this board through the articles that have been posted). My understanding of how this happened was that the attorney told David that he felt that he would be healthy enough to continue on as David's attorney throughout the civil trial. However, with the delays, his condition worsened and at a point roughly a few weeks (? not sure of the exact timing) before the scheduled start of David's civil trial, the attorney went to court on another case and it physically drained him. It was at that time that he realized that he was not going to be able to represent David in the civil trial after all.

At that time, David and that attorney went before Judge Hurst to ask for a continuance to find another attorney and it was at that time that she said no, the trial would proceed as scheduled.

So it is correct that David did know his attorney had cancer for some time - however, from what I was told, he was assured by his attorney that he would be able to present a defense for David at the civil trial and David, being someone who is not a person who easily trusts, was loath to switch to a new attorney after already doing that once. At least that's how I understand it to have taken place.

As to his statements and how they were/could be taken...while I generally like David, I will say that David will never be someone who is accused of having a soft-spoken, modest demeanor. David has opinions he's not going to keep quiet and he's been accused of being arrogant more than once. His social skills are not necessarily as polished as one could wish and once in a while, I've heard him say things that have made me cringe a little. And as a result of that, there are a lot of people who don't like him a heck of a lot - he can rub people the wrong way. I'm well aware of that. And despite that, I still like him, as do a lot of other people. Do I think his wording with Lisa Tyre was strange? If she remembers his wording accurately, then yes, I do. But again - I think that probably was a result of his extraordinary difficulty with expressing painful issues and that goes back to his childhood trauma. While maybe very few people (if anyone else) would use that way to inform someone of their daughter's death, none of us have lived through what he lived through.

I think we will have to agree to disagree on Olenn.
 
Sadiesmom - thanks for the additional information on Swain's attorney representation in the civil matter, here is more regarding his appeal on that basis:

"Concerning Swain's contention that he was denied legal representation because Judge Hurst refused to again delay the start of the civil trial, the high court again ruled against him.

Despite his contention, the court said, Swain failed to actually ask for a continuance before the trial started, a necessity for appeal purposes. Further, the court said, even if he had, it was clear by the case record that Hurst had urged Swain repeatedly to find another lawyer after one of his attorneys fell ill.."

Source: CDNN :: New Trial Denied for PADI Dive Shop Owner Accused of Killing Wife

I can't help but wonder why Swain repeatedly resisted the warnings of this judge over a long period of time. I don't think anyone will get a "pass" from the justice system on the basis of being generally mistrustful. He took the representation of a public defender when initially arrested, several partners in a Boston-based law firm, and a BVI-based defender, and it sounds like he had more than one lawyer in the civil case from what you describe.

*****
Olenn was not the first to suggest to Shelley's parents that her death was not an accident:

"..Richard Tyre said it was Thayer’s then headmaster, Eric Swain (no relation to his daughter’s husband) who suggested to him at the memorial service to look into the possibility that her death wasn’t an accident.."

Source: Husband convicted of killing former administrator at Thayer Academy in Braintree - Braintree, MA - Braintree Forum
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom