Diver Indicted in 2003 GBR mishap

[ERIC.K]

Accident or not, plan carefully when increasing your's or your spouse's life insurance policies, never under any circumstances do you increase your spouse's life insurance days before skydiving, scuba diving, race car driving, wild tiger training, booking a cruise with a balcony....etc

 

[ERIC.K]

One other thing, having been married for 15 years now and very happy, given the relative shallow depths that it appears that we are dealing with, DCS or embolism would never have kept me from at least an attempt at saving my soulmate. We could have been in 1000fsw and if my wife has drifted down to the 500fsw depth i'm going to try to save her or at least die trying. He is at least guilty of not trying. It's similar for me to the Scott Peterson case where he "WENT FISHING" on Christmas eve while his pregnant wife was home alone.....come on. Gabe should have at the very least assisted the dive master in a rescue attempt, it also sucks that he would allow another diver to risk himself saving HIS wife. If Gabe felt it was too dangerous for him to attempt a rescue it would certaily have been risky for another. Just my $.02. Very little effort from a man who shpuld have still been fully engaged in marital bliss

 

[jviehe]

I dont think anyone can predict what theyd do in this situation, much less what someone else would do. But, thats up to a court to decide. There seems to be almost no physical evidence here, so I doubt that if he did it, a jury will be able to judge that without a reasonable doubt. Whether this is the AUS standard of guilt, I dont know.

 

[K_girl]

Here is the transcript of the MSNBC TV news story which includes portions of the police interview with Gabe Watson shortly after the incident. During the entire interview, Watson never looked any of the investigators in the eye, he kept his head down, eyes diverted most of the time.

WATSON: Around 20 feet or so, um, you know felt the rope, was when uum, you know, we both realized you know, this current’s a lot stronger than what we feel comfortable diving in

NEWS REPORTER: Tina motioned, he said, that she wanted to go back to the anchor rope. Says he took her by the hand and began swimming back against the current, heading for where they started out.

WATSON: When I had her hand I realized, you know, this is not a good situation. Uum, so I started swimming, you know and we could see the rope and all that, and you know, as we were swimming, and I don’t know, I don’t know how far, you know as far as how many feet we had actually covered, but at some point as I noticed as I was swimming, she was dropping down (gestures downward with his hand). And it got to the point to where instead of both of us moving umm, horizontally through the water, you know, I was horizontal and she was almost vertical..

NEWS REPORTER: Gabe says he signalled Tina to squeeze the inflator hose on her buoyancy compensator vest that would allow her to float to the surface.

WATSON: I know she squeezed it, but if she squeezed it hard enough, or didn’t squeeze the right thing, or it wasn’t working, you know, I don’t know... (skip in tape).. that’s when uh, you know, I won’t say panic, but you know I could tell at that point you know, she was scared before it, but at that point I could tell you know, that she was frightened and that’s when I realized, you know something’s going on..

NEWS REPORTER: Since her vest didn’t inflate he thought they couldn’t surface so he says he grabbed hold of her vest at that point and started kicking towards the fixed line.

WATSON: The thoughts going through my head were um I’m going, going to get her back to the anchor rope and she can either pull herself up it or she can hold it until I can go get somebody..

NEWS REPORTER: It was then that it happened. Gabe says that as they swam back to the rope, Tina’s hand hit his mask and knocked it sideways. He needed space to clear it, he says, so he let her go. With his mask and breathing device back in place, Gabe sees that his wife is sinking.

WATSON: She was looking up had both her arms out (sigh) you know reached, stretched up, you know almost looking at me reaching her arms up (his hands are above his head in a reaching gesture) to grab. So (sigh) I kind of uh (his head down into folded hands) up-ended myself you know, head-first uum and I remember going down you know, reaching and at this point I was thinking you know, (grunt) I’m going to grab a-hold of her..

NEWS REPORTER: But Gabe said she was already out of reach.

WATSON: I couldn’t grab her hand cause she was (sigh) you know (mother is rubbing his back) maybe five feet below me something like that, I don’t really know. I went down, started kicking down and I was kicking down, but as fast as I was kicking down to go get her, uum she was, she was going down just as fast. And uh.. (sigh, mother is rubbing back faster) I just remember, I mean it (clear throat) it still shocks me you know, how, how clear some of the stuff, some of the thoughts that were going through my head..

NEWS REPORTER: A choice, should he follow her to the bottom hundred feet down, maybe pull her diving weights off or go to the surface and get help.

WATSON: And I thought well.. If I go to the bottom and she’s unconscious or something, I don’t, other than dumping her equipment, I don’t know of anything else to do. Uh, so I thought well, you know I’m halfway down, if I go all the way down, I can’t come back up quick just because of how deep it is (he is picking at his fingers, but looking down and away). (Mother is playing with her fingers, seemingly bored.) So, I thought well, I’ll just turn, shoot back to the anchor rope..

NEWS REPORTER: Swimming as fast as he could he said, he spotted some other divers at the anchor rope and tried to give them a distress signal, but they missed it.

WATSON: So, from that point, I just pretty much turned and pretty much just rocketed to the top. You know, I’m amazed that I didn’t end up with the bends or something.

NEWS REPORTER: Back on the surface, he set-off an alarm for Tina. The inflatable carried him back to the Spoil Sport where a few minutes later he was told that Tina had been found, brought back up and that doctors on a second dive boat nearby were working on her with an IV in her arm.

WATSON: You know, it was just a huge relief because I thought you know that they were re-hydrating her or something.

NEWS REPORTER: Within half-an-hour though, one of the doctors attending Tina came to break the news.

WATSON: I knew, when I saw him that he wasn’t coming to tell me you know, everything’s fine, she’s just got a headache or something. Uh (sniffle), you know and he walked over and said I don’t have good news. I did everything I could, but we lost her and you know, I just, you know, I just pretty much lost it.

NEWS REPORTER: Gabe asked to be taken over to see his dead bride.

WATSON: Then I told him I’ve got to go see her. So they arranged that. I went to see her. The worst thing I’ve ever experienced (sigh).

 

[ERIC.K]

I dont think anyone can predict what theyd do in this situation, much less what someone else would do. But, thats up to a court to decide. There seems to be almost no physical evidence here, so I doubt that if he did it, a jury will be able to judge that without a reasonable doubt. Whether this is the AUS standard of guilt, I dont know.

NOT TRUE! I can tell you with 100% certainty that I'm going to try to save my Wife Far harder than I have read that the diver in question tried or at the very least die trying! so Yes I can predict my own actions in This very same situation....Thank you very much. Sure it's up to the courts and not me but it's still a very lame rescue attempt by someone who was still supposed to be IN LOVE and just married. He is at least a coward if we are to believe that he "Just rocketed to the surface" he was afraid he was going to get the bends but in the end, his wife died. I'm not saying he is guilty of murder, I'm saying he is guilty of a lame rescue attempt and I believe that that lends people to be skeptical of his story

 

[Crimson Ghost]

NOT TRUE! I can tell you with 100% certainty that I'm going to try to save my Wife Far harder than I have read that the diver in question tried or at the very least die trying! so Yes I can predict my own actions in This very same situation....Thank you very much. Sure it's up to the courts and not me but it's still a very lame rescue attempt by someone who was still supposed to be IN LOVE and just married. He is at least a coward if we are to believe that he "Just rocketed to the surface" he was afraid he was going to get the bends but in the end, his wife died. I'm not saying he is guilty of murder, I'm saying he is guilty of a lame rescue attempt and I believe that that lends people to be skeptical of his story

Times 2 brother ! I'll also say that with 100% certainty I am going to save my wife, I can also assure you I would do the same it were an insta-buddy.

I still say there is evidence not being shared and he will be found guilty either in the states or abroad. Knowing he flat out lied about his ascent and his computer proved it - we have not heard anything of Tina's computer and what her dive profile says. Of course I am assuming she had one - perhaps a fair assumption tho. Because there is an eyewitness that saw them in a bearhug and then see's her drift off motionless (I forgot this in my last post) I beleive there is enough to convict of murder, 1st degree at that.

 

[Boxcar Overkill]

Boxcar Overkill (what a name!), correct me if I'm wrong, but Australia would have first "rights" to try this guy in a criminal case because the crime happened there.

On the other hand, if her family wanted to bring a civil suit for loss of consortium, they would probably be able to get it heard in Alabama. Frankly, for me, it's been one of the curious things about this. This all happened five years ago and there should be a statute of limitations on the family bringing the civil suit (of course, they could file and get it postponed until the criminal trial had finished). But I would have thought the family would have at least filed by now. Yet, I haven't seen it mentioned in any news reports.

Any thoughts on this?

Trish

My screen name came from a time I was researching how to make a boxcar for my son to race. I need to come up with name that wasn't taken on the forum, so I added overkill to the end of it. It was random, but sounded good, so I kept it.


There's no set order of who gets to try a defendant when two places have concurrent jurisdiction. But I don't know if there is a federal statute allowing a murder trial to be held in the U.S. for a crime committed in Australia. Generally, murder is a state crime, so I guess it would depend on the laws of Alabama, although it may be a federal issue.

The family could bring suit in Alabama because his residence was in Alabama, basically. I don't know why they have brought a wrongful death suit.

You bring up lots of good points.

As you're in Paris, are you French? Is this the term used internationally, or just in France? If it's used internationally is it modern French or descended from Norman French (like so much else in the English language)?

I've just answered my own question! Wonderful thing, Wikipedia. Seems it's middle French, which postdates the Norman era and probably owes nothing to Norman. Certainly not modern French.

Sorry , not relevant. I just find language and its origins fascinating.

The term Voir Dire, while French, is often used in common law courts. (Although in the mid-west and southern U.S. they usually mispronounce it.)

But I also find it amazing that in this day and age one can know the answer to just about any question almost instantly. Not so long ago, if you didn't know something, you just didn't know it.

Not anymore. It used to take a trip to the library to find out anything, and they may or may not have your answer after all day of searching. Now, almost everything that is knowable can be researched in seconds. It's really very cool, and the intellectually curious are very lucky to have been alive now.

 

[jviehe]

NOT TRUE! I can tell you with 100% certainty that I'm going to try to save my Wife Far harder than I have read that the diver in question tried or at the very least die trying! so Yes I can predict my own actions in This very same situation....Thank you very much. Sure it's up to the courts and not me but it's still a very lame rescue attempt by someone who was still supposed to be IN LOVE and just married. He is at least a coward if we are to believe that he "Just rocketed to the surface" he was afraid he was going to get the bends but in the end, his wife died. I'm not saying he is guilty of murder, I'm saying he is guilty of a lame rescue attempt and I believe that that lends people to be skeptical of his story

I fully accept that this is what you would want to do, or that this is what you think you would do. But you have no idea what the circumstances of any accident will be, so its impossible to predict your own actions. Certainty becomes more possible when you have extensive training and experience, but most divers never have a reason to panic, so judging what you would do is futile. Even less do we have any idea what happened in this case, or how the defendant reacted. We should be fully skeptical, but I find it pretty slanderous how people like Nancy Grace automatically assume that because he is a man, it must have been murder. Had it been the other way around, we would automatically assume an accident.

 

[Noboundaries]

its impossible to predict your own actions. Certainty becomes more possible when you have extensive training and experience, but most divers never have a reason to panic, so judging what you would do is futile.

I've had a lot of experience training people in life threatening situations, though diving isn't one of them yet. I've found that people do one of three things the instant they recognize danger:

1. They freeze....literally. They don't think, they don't act, they freeze. It is the ultimate response of denial in their effort to stop the progression of events.
2. They recoil, flail, or panic, often making a bad situation worse. Any action is better than no action in an attempt to escape the situation. Their reaction is actually a physical demonstration of the fight or flight syndrome and/or mental searching they are doing to find any solution to their dilemma.
3. They focus intently and respond. This behavior is a result of anticipation, preparation, and training. The focus can be so intense that nothing matters but the resolution of the situation using methods proven to work.

The first response is often demonstrated by those who have given absolutely no thought to an emergency situation.

The second response is often demonstrated by those familiar with an activity, who know the dangers, but give little prep time to a negative situation.

The third response is designed to overcome the first two natural fight or flight tendencies. It is the reason repetitive drills and annual recertifications are required for many professions. Time and time again you've heard humble heros interviewed in the media say "the training just kicked in and I acted without thinking." People are usually surprised by how calm they remain in the face of life ending danger.

It doesn't always have to be training that makes a person respond like #3. Certain personalities are just more aware of potential everyday dangers and often comtemplate scenarios and ask "how would I respond?" In effect they create their own set of procedures.

I've served on a jury involving a capital offense with a potential death penalty and remember being asked if I could remain objective during the trial. At that time the answer was "yes." Given this guy's rescue diver training and his bulldeposit explanations of what happened while his wife was DYING!!!!!!.......I'd have to admit during jury selection I'd throw the switch if they asked for volunteers.

 

[Law5Guy]

I saw this was story on CNN yesterday on the Nancy Grace show:

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

Click both links as they are diffent videos.