Diver convicted in wife's drowning

[baz500]

I'll tell you what..... I'll explain what I think happened and then you tell me what you think.

Swain and Sheeley went diving. They got to the bottom and split up. Minutes later Swain went behind Shelley, ripped off her mask thus displacing her snorkel and fin. He waited until she was motionless. He thought her fin might float to the surface therefore stuck it in the sand, or as part of what he thought might happen in a panic situation, he then thought "maybe" the snorkel and mouthpeice might come apart and so did that, he then wasted time swimming round the wrecks before ignoring her body as he ascended and asked "has Shelley came back yet?"

That to me is plausable.

Let's hear your explanation.

 

[K_girl]

The point about everything looks "bad" for Swain was not a point for saying that everything I mentioned is proof of guilt. Some is proof of motive, some is proof of character, some is proof of means, some is proof of opportunity and some is proof of guilt. These are things that a jury will weigh and they all have weight and will not be discarded. If it all could be discarded, it would not have been presented to the jury for consideration. The point I was trying to say is - there is nothing about the information we have in this case that makes Swain look good. It's all negative - it's all something that has to be explained away.

Well, I have to say - I think we have all basically run out of anything new to say. I've made a great many points about the problems with the defense case I think remain unchallenged or unanswered. There is no new information to discuss. We don't have the trial transcripts. So, the only thing to do now is to wait for the appeal.

I don't think Afterdark or Sadiesmom have personally attacked me. I consider them good people trying to help someone they believe in. I don't think they can do him much good here, but if they can find people who can agree with them, it will make them feel better. I don't blame them for wanting that - I understand it. Perhaps they can find some constructive way to help Swain, maybe getting donations for his defense on the new website. I don't begrudge them their efforts.

 

[AfterDark]

I'll tell you what..... I'll explain what I think happened and then you tell me what you think.

Swain and Sheeley went diving. They got to the bottom and split up. Minutes later Swain went behind Shelley, ripped off her mask thus displacing her snorkel and fin. He waited until she was motionless. He thought her fin might float to the surface therefore stuck it in the sand, or as part of what he thought might happen in a panic situation, he then thought "maybe" the snorkel and mouthpeice might come apart and so did that, he then wasted time swimming round the wrecks before ignoring her body as he ascended and asked "has Shelley came back yet?"

That to me is plausable.

Let's hear your explanation.

I'll tell you what. You show the evidence of the attacks you accused me of and where I said this thread has run it's course and I'll tell you what I think. I want evidence real attacks not sarcasm which I use as a matter of course.

 

[K_girl]

For me, the first question is what sort of force would it take to get you from a functional mask to the mask as it was found? Could a person of Shelley's size and strength have possibly accomplished it under any circumstances? Is it possible that the mask could have had some cracked plastic before entering the water and still worked perfectly until it failed as a result of some lesser amount of force? If so, is it possible that damage could have gone unnoticed? I don't recall, did they demonstrate that a person trying to rip the mask off a dummy head could result in this damage?

The prosecution already had the upper-hand when jury looked at the mask damage to the strap, pins and the missing snorkel mouthpiece - it evoked a mental picture of struggle and violence. In addition, the prosecution convinced the jury that this kind of damage had never happened before through their expert testimony. It is the defense that needs to look at these things you mentioned in order to combat the prosecution's case regarding the mask. We don't know if the defense made these arguments. However, pre-damage to the mask does not explain the missing snorkel mouthpiece. When you add the missing snorkel mouthpiece to the fin stuck in the sand and the missing slate, the probability of the mask damage begins to look less and less in favor of a defense explanation.

 

[Ayisha]

I'll tell you what..... I'll explain what I think happened and then you tell me what you think.

Swain and Sheeley went diving. They got to the bottom and split up. Minutes later Swain went behind Shelley, ripped off her mask thus displacing her snorkel and fin. He waited until she was motionless. He thought her fin might float to the surface therefore stuck it in the sand, or as part of what he thought might happen in a panic situation, he then thought "maybe" the snorkel and mouthpeice might come apart and so did that, he then wasted time swimming round the wrecks before ignoring her body as he ascended and asked "has Shelley came back yet?"

That to me is plausable.

Let's hear your explanation.

And don't forget all the damage to the left side of her equipment and the abrasions on her left hand and bruises on the left side of her body, and the left fin falling off as Swain pushed her down into the sand on the left side of her body, which gave him easy access to her valve on the right side, whether her reg was still in or out. If the reg was already out of her mouth, it would have been impossible for her to make a "sweep" to recover it while on her left side, since we tilt down and to the right to recover a reg.

That sounds plausible to me and fits all the evidence.

I'm just sayin'

 

[Ayisha]

... Nowhere in those posts did I read an estimate made by ME of how long it took Dave to go round the wrecks. I used the prosecutions estimate. I had / have no idea how long it took him. I do remember Swain said something to the effect that he left the wrecks at some point and went to the reef, how long he spent there I don't know.

You are twisting words yet again. I did not say that you made an estimate. This is what I said:

The prosecution says the tour took 3 minutes. You and Sadies Mom say much longer with a camera - which, BTW is in the prosecution's favour. At anytime from 8 minutes when the prosecution determined her time of death up until 35 minutes, Swain would have passed Shelley either alive or dead. Her body was still in the same place where he claimed to have left her alive and well.

You and Sadies Mom both said that it would take longer with a camera than the prosecution's contention; no one said that you gave an "estimate". If you or Sadies Mom deny making a statement to that effect, I will dig up your quotes. I know approximately where they are.

BTW, I am on holiday for the next couple of weeks, so we can do this as much as you'd like. If you continue to "spin" posts, I will continue to correct you. The increased post count in this thread and the resulting "newer" people finding this thread now is due to AfterDark attacking any post that is counter to his position. The attacks have been on a semantic level and appear to be purposefully misleading, rather than attacking the core of arguments.

I'm not willing to see anyone serve one minute of time regardless of their guilt unless that guilt is proven with solid evidence. I'm just an old fashion guy.

bold added

That is a very interesting statement.

 

[AfterDark]

"I'm not willing to see anyone serve one minute of time regardless of their guilt unless that guilt is proven with solid evidence. I'm just an old fashion guy". AfterDark

William Blackstone. in Commentaries on the Laws of England (1769), Blackstone wrote that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer."

Seems I'm not in such bad company on this belief, I just didn't state it the same. I didn't realize how old fashion I am, 1769!

Ayisha, which definition of attack are you using when you to describe my response(s) to posts? If it's not #3, I would like to see proof of 1,2 or 4. Excluding the troll of course.

1. To set upon with violent force.
2. To criticize strongly or in a hostile manner.
3. To start work on with purpose and vigor
4. To begin to affect harmfully

I'm waiting for bz500 to cite like posts also. (see post 742)

Before SaidesMom started posting here I didn't know Swain had a camera on that dive. Since then I believe it was also cited from other sources. After learning of that information I probably did repeated it in subsequent posts. Why not? Is it unreasonable or unlikely that it would take longer while taking pictures? If helps the prosecution then so be it. As I've stated often I'm interested in verifiable truth. Enjoy your holiday.

 

[K_girl]

I've started a new thread for reference materials on this case:

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/no...ain-case-reference-materials-no-comments.html

If you wish to post, please post only reference materials such as articles, court rulings, graphics, videos, etc. - no comments please. Comments should remain on this thread.

Thanks.

 

[SadiesMom]

I have to say that it has got to the point where I believe Sadiesmom and Afterdark have ran out of ideas and excuses and are now attacking the people who are putting forward explanations for what is more likely to have happened as opposed to giving reasonable arguments against the evidence.

I'm sorry, but you're going to have to point this out to me. I've gone back over 20 pages and read every one of my posts and I can't find a single one where I've attacked another poster here for putting forward an alternate explanation. I don't tend to attack other posters. Granted, I have one poster's comments blocked because it's an admitted troll - other than that one exception, while I may disagree with the point of view of other posters I have respect for them as people and I don't believe that I have attacked anyone personally. I would appreciate your pointing it out if you feel that I have.

Honestly, I agree that there's little point left to posting on this thread. Those who are posting have formed opinions and are no longer open to anything new. I see very little point in my continuing to post here.

 

[bsee65]

I wish everyone would just operate on facts and keep an open mind beyond that. If the facts support a verdict of guilty for Swain, why do those who insist he is guilty feel compelled to exaggerate them? For example:

And don't forget all the damage to the left side of her equipment and the abrasions on her left hand and bruises on the left side of her body, and the left fin falling off as Swain pushed her down into the sand on the left side of her body, which gave him easy access to her valve on the right side, whether her reg was still in or out. If the reg was already out of her mouth, it would have been impossible for her to make a "sweep" to recover it while on her left side, since we tilt down and to the right to recover a reg.

Reading the autopsy report presented in K_girl's other thread, there seem to be an assortment of bruises spread between the left and right legs, including the right foot, but not the left. The mention of abrasions on the left hand doesn't suggest anything particularly significant, and, if anything, I would expect some damage to one or both palms and the fingers from the alleged struggle. Someone put forth the proposition that a week of small boat diving could easily result in a bunch of bruises of that nature from dealing with heavy gear and boarding/exiting the boat. In any case, I don't see any significant favoring of damage to the left side of the body or head to correspond with the above comment. I would find it surpising that all the force supposedly required to do the damage to the mask that was evidenced would not result in bruising to the head and face. To me, the lack of such bruising suggests that either the mask broke without great direct force, or it was pulled apart after it was removed from Shelley's head. The former would be consistant with Swain's claim of innocence, the latter his guilt.

It was also claimed that a pro like Swain would have been able to grab Shelley's tank between his knees and turn off her air while maintaining complete control. That wouldn't result in any particular signs of trauma.