Diver Indicted in 2003 GBR mishap

[ItsBruce]

©ª still think the prosecution still has a strong case without his statements. Here is why: The eye witness stated that a male diver had Tina in a bear hug, his arms around her, he saw the fear in Tina's eyes, but he thought the male diver was trying to rescue her. Then the male diver let go of her and "let" her sink to the bottom. The eye witness realized that there was no attempt to save Tina, the male diver let her go and let her sink. This is in direct contradiction to Gabe's statement on the surface that he had "lost" her. Even though the eye witness did not see Gabe turn off Tina's air, he did see the male diver "let go" of Tina and let her sink. ©¼/QUOTE]

I've got some new concerns:

1. I always worry when someone says something like he saw fear in someone's eyes. Can he really tell it is fear? Can one really see fear in someone's eyes while under water while the person is wearing a dive mask? Or is the witness stretching things to help convict someone he thinks is guilty?

2. Couldn't the "fear" in Tina's eyes have been panic ... the kind that kills otherwise competent divers?

3. If the witness was watching closely enough to be able to say that Tina did not dislodge Gabe's mask and regulator, he would have been watching closely enough to have seen Gabe turn off Tina's air and/or turn it back onif that is what actually happened. (Remember the air was on when Tina's body was recovered.) So, why didn't the witness see Gabe turn Tina's air off or back on?

4. I am concerned that the witness "realized that there was no attempt to save Tina." Maybe there is stuff I'm overlooking, but what qualifies the witness to reach this conclusion? What specific details did the witness see that led to this conclusion? Was there something more than that Gabe had not dumped Tina's weights, had not inflated Tina's BCD, terminated the bear hug and failed to follow her down?

Let's take the specific elements I just noted:

How many divers forget to dump their own weights when they get into trouble? Would it be out of the question for Gabe to forget to dump Tina's weights and to just hang onto her?

How many divers forget to inflate their own BCD when they get into trouble? Would it be out of the question for Gabe to forget to inflate Tina's BCD and to just hang onto her?

How many times have people lost their grip?

I've been through rescue dive training. I've been trained not to put myself at risk to rescue someone else. However, if it were my new bride (or old bride or child), I hope I would disregard my training and do anything I could to rescue her regardless of risk I might incur or discomfort I might have to endure. But, as I sit here today, I cannot be positive I would not freeze or make a series of bad decisions.

Finally (at least for today), Gabe's story does not pass the "smell test." Based on what I've heard (which I acknowledge is quite limited), I think I would find Gabe civilly liable for Tina's death. I do not know if all of my reasonable doubts have been satisfied.

 

[peterbj7]

Gabe's story does not pass the "smell test."

I think it smells quite strongly!

On this "eye witness", what do we know about the underwater environment that day, how far away the witness was, and how well he could see (whether his vision was blocked by one of the key players). I don't necessarily expect this information to be in the public forum but it is key to the credibility of his testimony.

I was accused of physical assault some time ago by someone I'd had a verbal argument (only) with, and his case was supported by an "eye witness". I cross-examined this witness in Court, and got answers that persuaded the magistrate to take over my questioning. In short, from the positioning of the key players and the witness, according to the witness's own testimony, it would have been impossible for him to have seen what he purported to have seen. He wasn't being dishonest (at least, I don't think he was) but he was interpreting what he saw, as we all do, and drew inappropriate conclusions. His evidence was dismissed, as were the charges.

So, what were the circumstances under which this witness (is this the doctor that has been mentioned? - I'm getting a bit confused) was able to see anything, what does he believe he saw, and do we believe him?

 

[openmindOW]

Does anyone out there know what the Burdens of Proof are under Australian law?

 

[ItsBruce]

Does anyone out there know what the Burdens of Proof are under Australian law?

According to "Australian Principles Of Evidence" (Second Edition) by Jeremy Gans & Andrew Palmer,, the prosecution's burden of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt." The book cites to section 141(1) of the Uniform Evidence Legislation. This makes sense as Australian law derives from the English Common Law (as does US law) and it uses "beyond a reasonable doubt."

See
Australian Principles of Evidence - Google Book Search

 

[almitywife]

update: Accused 'honeymoon killer' ordered to court - National - smh.com.au

Accused honeymoon killer Gabe Watson is required to face an Australian court for the first time tomorrow.

Prosecutors late last year filed an indictment in the Townsville Supreme Court against David Gabriel Watson, 31, over the death of his wife Tina on the Great Barrier Reef in 2003.

The indictment requires him to appear in court tomorrow.

But Justice Keiran Cullinane last year conceded he had no power to force the Alabama-based bubble-pack salesman to return to north Queensland.

A no-show is likely to lead to the start of extradition proceedings.

Watson's US-based lawyers have already indicated they are likely to oppose his extradition in US courts.

In mid-2008 coroner David Glasgow found that it was likely Watson killed his 26-year-old wife by holding her under water and turning off her air supply.

The couple were 11 days into their honeymoon when Tina drowned during a dive expedition to the Yongala wreck, off the coast of Townsville, on October 22, 2003.

The inquest heard one possible motive for the murder was Tina's modest life insurance policy.

Watson has not been arrested in the US and has since remarried.

 

[Airleron]

OMG...what idiot married this killer/scumbag?

 

[I Dive]

Let's hope his new wife isn't a diver...

 

[ItsBruce]

Thanks for the update.

I realize that media sources (I hesitate to call them "news") rarely get all the details right, but I sure hope that the statement that the coroner's theory is than that Watson killed his wife by holding her underwater and turning off her air supply, is a gross over-simplification. I hope the coroner has more than that.

As I recall, when Tina was brought to the surface, her air was "on." Therefore the theory would have to include that either (1) Watson turned the air back on, or (2) the dive master who recovered her turned her air back on.

However, to my knowledge the dive master has said nothing about turning Tina's air back on. Since this would undoubtedly have been reported, had it happened, we must conclude the dive master did not turn Tina's air back on. Therefore, we must go with #1, that Watson turned the air back on.

However, as described elsewhere in the thread, there was a witness who was watching closely enough to (1) see fear in Tina's eyes and (2) see that Watson's mask was not dislodged. I have not seen anywhere where this witness has said he saw Watson turn Tina's air on. I assume that had the witness seen this, we would have heard of it.

Further, had Watson turned Tina's air off and then back on before the witness started watching, either (1) Tina was breathing when Watson released her and she sunk, or (2) Tina was not breathing, when Watson released her and she sunk. If it was the former, then when Watson released her and she sunk, her air was on and she was breathing it and had no good reason to stop doing so. If it was the latter, then how could the witness have seen fear in her eyes? ... she would have been unconscious or dead!

As a result of the foregoing, the theory must be that Watson killed Tina by holding Tina under water, turning her air off and then turning it back on in such a way that an observant witness did not see him turn it back on and that witness confused fear in Tina's eyes for unconsciousness or death.

I'm sorry, but either we don't have the whole story here or something simply does not fit.

Having said this, I'm still concerned about all of the apparent inconsistencies in Watson's story. These make me suspect that there is something still missing here. (The bit about the insurance makes me suspicious but, based on my experience, it proves nothing at all.)

 

[Ayisha]

I sure hope that the statement that the coroner's theory is than that Watson killed his wife by holding her underwater and turning off her air supply, is a gross over-simplification. I hope the coroner has more than that.

The coroner's theory regarding how Watson probably killed his wife is in the 12 page Coroner's Report referenced in this thread and the other one:

http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/Watson20080620.pdf

The police interviews and police video re-enactment (using Gabe and Tina's actual equipment) of the way that Watson could have turned off Tina's air, bear-hugged her and then turned on Tina's air before letting go of her limp, lifeless body have been linked to from this thread and the other one and have been on primetime TV.

Gabe's back was to the eye witness and he would have been turning the valve with his left hand, which was apparently not visible to the witness.

BTW, on CNN, a cororner was interviewed who said that the "bear hug" could indeed have caused her to asphyxiate much faster, which is contrary to some opinions on this thread.

 

[mike_s]

I haven't been keeping up with this thread, so sorry if this has been said before (and not going to check back through the 900+ posts).


but I just read this.
Honeymoon diver-murder accused Gabe Watson may snub court | The Courier-Mail

The irony of the story is that apparently with even all this publicity, he's remarried. And there's more... apparently she looks just like his first wife?

from the story:

The American bubble-wrap salesman is living in a suburban home with his new wife, a lookalike of Watson's alleged victim and wife of 11 days, Tina Watson.​