murder @ french reef??????????

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!

Omission raises eyebrows, but dive death case remains in limbo | KeysNews.com

Omission raises eyebrows, but dive death case remains in limbo
BY ROBERT SILK Free Press Staff
rsilk@keysnews.com
PLANTATION KEY -- An omission under oath by the lone suspect in a mysterious 2008 diving death off Key Largo could give local authorities a new matter to mull over.

Meanwhile, a second written analysis into the death of Joanne Page, this one conducted by the U.S. Navy's point man on dive-related fatalities, has backed up the conclusion of Monroe County Medical Examiner E. Hunt Scheuerman that her death was suspicious, though not conclusively a homicide.

Authorities have investigated Eugene "E.B." Jackson, a hotel builder from Salisbury, N.C., for a potential role in the death of Page on Oct. 30, 2008. He was the only person in the presence of his girlfriend when she died after the couple got separated from their dive boat during a chartered excursion to French Reef.

The death of the 51-year-old mother of two, which seemed fairly ordinary at first, piqued the interest of law enforcement agencies after an autopsy revealed that Page had a series of neck injuries consistent with strangulation. Though Scheuerman eventually ruled the cause of death to be undetermined, he still harbors suspicions about the case. In April he told the Free Press that had Page died on land, he definitely would have ruled it a homicide.

Another area of intrigue: after Page's body was returned to land that day, investigators noticed the valve on her dive tank was closed -- an action that both men who assisted in pulling Page from the water say they did not take, records show.

In an Oct. 21 deposition from a civil case spawned by Page's death, an omission by Jackson has raised eyebrows.

Asked by an attorney for an opposing side in the case to describe his fatal dive with Page, Jackson detailed a relatively mundane excursion along the reef in which they surfaced only at its conclusion.

"And when we came up out of the water we were on the opposite side of the boat that we went in," he said.

The account is consistent with what Jackson has told investigators all along; that he and Page had surfaced from the dive on the down current side of the boat and hadn't been able to reach the vessel against rough seas. While swimming, Jackson maintains, he turned around and noticed Page was floating on her back. He then tried in vain to save his lover.

But Jackson's account of the dive is not consistent with information from the dive computers he and Page wore that day, which was released to opposing parties in the civil case after the deposition.

The computer logs show that 14 minutes into the 22-minute, 40-foot dive, Jackson surfaced briefly before going back down. Page, meanwhile, followed him up from the bottom, but remained 11 feet under the surface.

On its face, such a move isn't unusual. Divers are routinely advised to surface and check their position relative to their boat midway through a shallow-water descent, said Rob Bleser, owner of Quiescence Diving Services in Key Largo.

But Mark Hruska, the attorney who was deposing Jackson and defending dive concessionaire It's A Dive in the civil suit, is curious how Jackson could have forgotten about such a boat check, especially since it likely would have revealed that they were already on the wrong side of the boat and, therefore, in some peril.

When rescuers eventually found the couple an estimated hour after they surfaced for good, they were ¬½- to ¾-mile from the dive boat, according to testimony.

"More than likely, for them to be found as far away as they were found, you almost had to start in the wrong direction and continue in the wrong direction," dive shop owner Bleser said.

Hruska says the revelation that Jackson surfaced, combined with his omission under oath, has led him to wonder what the North Carolina builder was really looking for.

"If you're down current, you would signal crazily," he said. "The other way you could argue is that he went back up to see that nobody was around and did what he did."

In an interview last week, State Attorney Dennis Ward said that Jackson's failure to tell of his mid-dive surfacing could potentially be used by prosecutors as evidence of a guilty mind-set. But he cautioned that the issue alone doesn't materially change the case against Jackson.

"When you take it all into context, yeah, it could be an omission that could have some meaning down the road," he said. "Is it going to break the case wide open where we have a better case to go forward? I don't think so."

Ward said he still needs investigators to unearth more information about a possible motive in the case.

More investigation is exactly what Capt. James Caruso, the Navy's dive-related fatalities expert, said is needed if the case Medical Examiner's Office is ever going to be able to reclassify Page's death from an undetermined one to a homicide.

"[T]his is a suspicious death and the circumstances and autopsy findings are inconsistent," he wrote in his September 2010 review. "Therefore, the best classification for manner of death is undetermined until additional investigative information is available to classify it otherwise."

Jackson declined to comment for this story and his attorney, Lawrance Craig of Miami, didn't respond to phone calls from the Free Press.
 
Thank you Ayisha for keeping us updated on this case. Is there anything anyone can think of that could cause neck injuries in scuba gear that would otherwise be ruled as strangulation if it occurred on land? Is there a way that the examiner could determine the amount of pressure required and the length of time to cause those injuries?
 
No water in lungs? Hmmmm......If the valve was closed at the get-go, it would have been IMMEDIATELY apparent. And, when the air "ran out" there would have been a drowning.

The marks imply strangulation. The coroner's report said nothing about other good signs of manual strangulation. Were there any Petechial Hemorrhages? These, along with dry lungs, might be a good indication of murder. Sadly, no reference to the absence or presence of this clue.

My vote? MURDER!!
 
Is it that police are just not informed well enough in scuba to see these obvious signs of foul play? I've been seeing too many of these stories of women dying in scuba accidents where the stories of their partners don't quite add up. One story I heard on these boards was a rescue diver who's story was inconsistent with what you're taught in the rescue diver course. It's all very frustrating to see these people get away when it's obvious to all of us.
 
Is it that police are just not informed well enough in scuba to see these obvious signs of foul play? I've been seeing too many of these stories of women dying in scuba accidents where the stories of their partners don't quite add up. One story I heard on these boards was a rescue diver who's story was inconsistent with what you're taught in the rescue diver course. It's all very frustrating to see these people get away when it's obvious to all of us.
Welcome to SB. Do you know anyone involved in this case or have information we have not seen...??
 
Is it that police are just not informed well enough in scuba to see these obvious signs of foul play? I've been seeing too many of these stories of women dying in scuba accidents where the stories of their partners don't quite add up. One story I heard on these boards was a rescue diver who's story was inconsistent with what you're taught in the rescue diver course. It's all very frustrating to see these people get away when it's obvious to all of us.
Surely it's more likely that it's because the police are in possession of whatever details they develop through investigation of the actual incident, while we are playing a parlor game based on what some reporter wrote, with some occasional hearsay.
 
It is one thing to have suspicions or enough to hold a private opinion (for which there are no consequences if wrong) and having a case that can go to court. It's nowhere near sufficient to have mere conflicts in accounts made from memory at different times. Memory is notoriously fallible. Now, it's true that a clear medical demonstration of a mortal injury with no other reasoned cause and the exclusion anyone by the accused can make a case. Child abuse case frequently have little more. This situation is different.

I note that some of the private opinions here were formed on the basis of various persons' accounts of events and a vaguely worded news story about indications consistent with strangulation. And added to the mix are various individuals' partial knowledge. For instance, talk of petechiae and dry lungs. Petechial hemorrhages can result from a number of different causes and may well not be present in a strangulation. And a substantial percentage of drowning victims have no water in their lungs, and many more have very little. The point of that is that a great deal of medical evidence is not definitive. Various experts can be solicited by both sides in a trial to testify to innocent and guilty reasons any sign may or may not have been present or may or may not have been observed. And lack of motive is a very great problem for prosecution.

It is not uncommon for the police to be privately convinced of guilt without being ready to prosecute. Aside from wishing to not prosecute an innocent person, you don't want to go into a trial of someone you believe to be guilty unless you have a reasonable chance of proving it. A not guilty verdict means you cannot try again later, even if you get absolute proof. And you don't just take a wild shot at a trial, because time very often produces the key to a case. It's quite surprising what can turn up. The longest I had was an eyewitness to murder (worked as a suspicious missing persons case) who walked into the office ten years later.
 
Bull, he could've kept her above water using her BC, not her neck.
"... Jackson has previously told investigators he tried to save his girlfriend after he saw her floating on her back..."
Appears like keeping her face up, above water wasn't an issue.
 
Admittedly, I have not read all 5 pages. However, under the circumstances strangulation isn't the only (or even most obvious) explanation for bones and cartilage broken on the front of the neck. The most obvious is that he tried to either tow her from behind with his arm around her neck, or that he was behind her and, in an attempt to keep her head out of the water, had grabbed her around her neck. Combine that with panic, poor bouyancy, and surface chop and I think reasonable doubt is more than established.

As Benjamin Franklin said, it is better a hundred guilty men escape than one innocent man suffer. Or, as Chief Wiggum said, I would rather let 10 guilty men escape than chase them.
 
A hose, whether a reg, or spg, could of got wrapped around during rescue. they never mention what is probable cause of front of neck injuries.

To end ones life underwater is a wonder? as said earlier there was no motive that has been proven.

Happy Diving
 

Back
Top Bottom