JC Lynes
I think you are absolutely correct in bringing this up. I think there must be hundreds and hundreds of other cases just like this that the defense can use to establish that different divers under duress make different decisions in the stress of the moment. PADI at least supports this to some degree, saying that the decision to take on "some personal risk" is crucial in the "stop and think" aspect of becoming a rescue diver. They go on to say that it is never a good idea to put oneself in danger in attempting a rescue and that oftentimes getting someone else to help is a better decision because it can insure that others are aware of what is going on.
I have no doubt that the defense will hammer this point home ad infinitum in the extradition hearing and ultimately the trial should that ever become needed, leaving the prosecutors with a hell of a task to overcome.
There are so many sources that that say divers need to write down what is happening when it happens. If Gabe didn’t do this, it could be argued that this was because his wife had just died. If others, the crew, DMs, etc, didn’t do this, then memory lapses would be considered par for the course (Gabe’s being only one of many), leaving his discrepancies in the interview as evidence of nothing more than the effects of trauma and worry about what had happened.
What we feel personally has nothing to do with what can be proven in court.
Cheers!
You are correct in how the defense will try to defend this issue, but you and the defense will miss the point the prosecution will make - and it will be an excellent point. Here is the issue - Tina and her parents believed that Watson was a rescue-certified diver with skills to help Tina in an emergency. It was Watson led them to believe that was true. In this police interview, Watson denied having ever been taught how to do any of the rescue skills involving helping another diver. Anyone who has ever been rescue-certified knows that is an absolute crock. Everyone can understand even a qualified diver who freaks out and goes to the surface in an emergency. But there is no reasonable way to understand his denial that he ever received the training in the first place. He is down-playing his knowledge so much at times that it sounds like he has no idea what it is like to even be underwater. I could make another complete issue out of that alone. Then Watson later said he was afraid people would think she is an idiot, giving a subliminal message that you should consider that Tina was wholly responsible for what happened - and he just really had to get that part off his chest. This is a common ploy of the guilty - suggest that someone else is at fault, but of course, they themselves would never think so. You need to understand each issue in its wholeness to understand his behavior. This is difficult because a single issue is weaved in-and-out through his entire testimony.
---
WATSON: [regarding his rescue training] ..the only thing that we've that we ever did was ah done at like around twenty feet where basically we dumped our own gear and did you know the purging, hook up, let your air go and all that you know for yourself and that's what I was thinking of, that most of the training I've had is basically taking care of yourself, not you know had we there was nothing as far as taking care of somebody else..
---
WATSON: ..could do um you know some of those things, there wasn’t there was nothing in our thing about how to get somebody, how to do any type of revival or anything from the bottom there was nothing about, other than controlled ascent you know sharing air ah there was nothing..
1.1 [Revival at the bottom is not possible because it involves rescue breathing and CPR, neither of which can be done underwater. The victim must be taken to the surface. This is common sense and this skill is heavily practiced in the rescue course.]
---
WATSON: ..I was afraid they were going to come out an say stuff about her, you know
saying she was an idiot or
she had no idea what she was doing cause that’s, you know she did but just kind of at the tail end he said ‘we don’t feel that it’s diver related because it was near perfect diving conditions’..you know, and we may never know I don’t know but I, I just had to get that off my chest and.. cause we’re, you know, everybody been talking with us like you know like, would hate myself if I left not saying what I think I need to be said.
[He is trying to argue with someone who said it was not diver-related because he does want consideration that it was Tina's fault. The idea anyone would even think of calling Tina an idiot is unthinkable, most especially a first-time diver.]
