ACES50 and Clownfishsydney know one another. The comment was certainly meant to be sarcastic. I took it as such. Smileys would have helped. 
Tina Watson Death - The Full Story
- Thread starter clownfishsydney
- Start date
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
OP
clownfishsydney
Contributor
I also took it as sarcasm aimed at others, however I did not know that it was David Watson.
As to the re-enactments, Ayisha, please read my re-enactment section again on my web site. The currents were NOT like those on the day Tina died. On that day all agree that the current was from north or more likely north-west, and maybe even from the west.
The first day of re-enactment the current was from south or south-west. This can be told by the fish swimming in that direction constantly, the divers bubble moving to the north or north-east and some lines that the Police put down also going in this direction. The second day the current appears to have varied from south-west to north-west. The last day it was from north-west. On none of the days did the current appear a strong as the majority of opinion was, that is, moderate to strong. In addition, the starting point for the drifts did not coincide at all with Gabe's description of where he was on the wreck when he lost Tina.
Of all the five "drifts" (as the Police called them) they did, only one came close to re-enacting what Gabe said happened, and if that had started where he said he was, the ending spot would have been pretty close to where I believe Tina ended up. Note that I do not believe that the spot identified by Wade Singleton to the Police was correct as the distance off the wreck was far more than every eye-witness stated they saw Tina or Wade's weight belt (which he dropped as soon as he tried to lift her). It was even 6 metres further off the wreck than Wade stated in all his statements and at the coroner's inquest which happened after the re-enactments.
Even the re-enactment that ended up with Tina at the spot Wade identified was flawed, by the time the diver playing Tina started dropping he had moved 5 or 10 metres from his stated starting point. The re-enactments were total and utter rubbish, done in the most part by divers who if they joined my dive club would not be permitted to dive without close supervision.
As to the re-enactments, Ayisha, please read my re-enactment section again on my web site. The currents were NOT like those on the day Tina died. On that day all agree that the current was from north or more likely north-west, and maybe even from the west.
The first day of re-enactment the current was from south or south-west. This can be told by the fish swimming in that direction constantly, the divers bubble moving to the north or north-east and some lines that the Police put down also going in this direction. The second day the current appears to have varied from south-west to north-west. The last day it was from north-west. On none of the days did the current appear a strong as the majority of opinion was, that is, moderate to strong. In addition, the starting point for the drifts did not coincide at all with Gabe's description of where he was on the wreck when he lost Tina.
Of all the five "drifts" (as the Police called them) they did, only one came close to re-enacting what Gabe said happened, and if that had started where he said he was, the ending spot would have been pretty close to where I believe Tina ended up. Note that I do not believe that the spot identified by Wade Singleton to the Police was correct as the distance off the wreck was far more than every eye-witness stated they saw Tina or Wade's weight belt (which he dropped as soon as he tried to lift her). It was even 6 metres further off the wreck than Wade stated in all his statements and at the coroner's inquest which happened after the re-enactments.
Even the re-enactment that ended up with Tina at the spot Wade identified was flawed, by the time the diver playing Tina started dropping he had moved 5 or 10 metres from his stated starting point. The re-enactments were total and utter rubbish, done in the most part by divers who if they joined my dive club would not be permitted to dive without close supervision.
Last edited:
I think that ACES50 (Gabe's father) has been very restrained in his participation on the threads here. This is the first time I have seen him use sarcasm. While it may not have been the best way to respond IMHO on recognizing the poster Kreed the nature of her post many people in his position would have responded in such a manner or much much more negatively!
Sorry I really should read back before I respond to a post :doh:
Last edited:
Lookmanohands, yes, I am Tina's cousin that was in court every single day, no I did not do an interview. Didn't know this was supposed to be a Gabe support page, I thought it was an open forum. Me and my family did for a long time think this was a terrible accident, but did change our minds once we were shown the evidence.
Foxfish
Contributor
This thread gives us an opportunity to learn more about the defence's case through Michael's first hand experience and the knowledge he has gained having been involved with the defence team. I have no problem seeing people challenge the facts that are presented by Michael or requesting clarification of the points being made. So far I believe that Michael, in general, has been able to counter the criticism and provided further explanation where needed.
Over the years I've witnessed the enormous, one sided, sensationalized media coverage this case has received in which Gabe was routinely referred to as the 'honeymoon killer' and portrayed as the bad guy who probably murdurered his beautiful, innocent young bride. No one seemed too concerned about the feelings of the Watson family at the time. I find it ironic that people like Zeroed should now demand that we desist any further discussion on the matter. In the end the case got thrown out of court in America for the same reason that it did in Australia. It had little substance and relied instead on innuendo and hearsay.
It seems highly unlikely that there will be new, substantiated evidence implicating Gabe. If you have it then let's hear it. So far all I read from your side is the same old innuendo and hearsay. This thread is not the place to continue the propaganda war against Gabe and I'd like to see it stop. I would like to see Michael and others with 'inside' information given an opportunity to present what they know without undue harassment or restraint.
No one is forcing anyone to participate in this thread or read the comments. For those who were close to Tina and who find it painful to engage in the discussion the obvious answer is don't.
Last edited:
OP
clownfishsydney
Contributor
Below is a link to YouTube and a video that my wife Kelly put together of Blue Water Quarry in Birmingham, Alabama, where Gabe and Tina did their training. As you can see, it is a very easy place to dive. Note that the first half of the video is just over 25 metres or almost 90 feet.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/46KUjc5TSag
http://www.youtube.com/embed/46KUjc5TSag
No Kreed this is not a Gabe support page nor is a page to attack him. It is a page where people can hopefully consider the information from both sides in a fair, open minded and courteous way (as the title implies). A thread titled the GABE WATSON MURDER thread certainly is inappropriate based on the fact he has not been found guilty of Murder.. it does certainly imply guilt! If you read back you will see that most posters have tried to examine the information and post comments in a sensitive and respectful way. A lot of information seems to have been one sided for years (as I have commented on before multiple times over the years) now we are hearing information from Watson's perspective. Being open to and wanting to hear both sides of the story does not make us fans of either Thomases or Watsons.
As divers we want to consider how this incident occurred and how we should respond in the way we dive. We also want to educate ourselves and others about safety issues and misconceptions regarding safe diving practices. The concept that all you have to do is push the inflate button to save your life is an example of very dangerous misinformation. Understanding and recognising active and passive panic has the postential to save lives. It is tragic indeed that Tina is gone so young but we hope that we can learn from her passing so others may survive.
I am sorry for your pain and loss but I also am sorry for the loss that the Watsons have suffered as well. I will not however apologize for believing the analysis of Dr Edmunds, Michael McFayden, Divedoggie or other people whose knowledge and experience I respect. Neither will I apologize for coming to conclusions based on my own knowledge of scuba and how people react in emergency situations. IMHO this was indeed a tragic accident as a result of errors made by a number of people including Gabe and Tina.
I can wish that you would be able to see things differently through your pain but I suspect sadly that is not likely. I hope you and the rest of the people involved in this terrible situation can find peace and the road to healing. :consolation:
As divers we want to consider how this incident occurred and how we should respond in the way we dive. We also want to educate ourselves and others about safety issues and misconceptions regarding safe diving practices. The concept that all you have to do is push the inflate button to save your life is an example of very dangerous misinformation. Understanding and recognising active and passive panic has the postential to save lives. It is tragic indeed that Tina is gone so young but we hope that we can learn from her passing so others may survive.
I am sorry for your pain and loss but I also am sorry for the loss that the Watsons have suffered as well. I will not however apologize for believing the analysis of Dr Edmunds, Michael McFayden, Divedoggie or other people whose knowledge and experience I respect. Neither will I apologize for coming to conclusions based on my own knowledge of scuba and how people react in emergency situations. IMHO this was indeed a tragic accident as a result of errors made by a number of people including Gabe and Tina.
I can wish that you would be able to see things differently through your pain but I suspect sadly that is not likely. I hope you and the rest of the people involved in this terrible situation can find peace and the road to healing. :consolation:
Foxfish
Contributor
Clownfishsydney, what was the defence team's opinion on what likely happened in the moments before Tina died. At what point did Tina start to lose consciousness? How long does it take for a person to become unconscious after starting to drown? How long to become clinically dead? Was there any attempt by Dr Edmonds to relate the final moments before Tina drowned as recounted by Gabe to these normal stages of drowning? I previously made comment about drowning divers experiencing convulsions called a samba. Was this discussed as a possible explanation of Tina's panic and 'flailing' witnessed by Gabe and Stutz? I made some attempt to provide an explanation of the stages of drowning in the previous thread and would be interested to hear something along those lines from someone like Dr Edmonds.
Why is this important? Firstly, if Gabes testimony regarding those moments is inconsistent with what you would expect when a person drowns then it undermines the integrity of the testimony. You will recall this was one of the reasons Snyder was so dismissive of Gabe's testimony from the start. Gabe had said he saw Tina panic and then serenely sink to the bottom. Snyder considered these were contradictory statements. Secondly, it was widely believed that Gabe murdered Tina by turning her air off while holding her in a bear hug, allowed her to drown, and then turned the air back on. Stutz testimony as to how long Gabe appeared to 'have his arm around Tina' varied over the years. I've seen everything from momentarily in the most recent testimony up to 30 seconds. One of the Australian appeal judges even claimed that the postmortem should have stated Tina died due to asphyxiation rather than drowning. This again begs the question, how long does it take a person to become unconscious if asphyxiated? Was it likely that Tina would not have revived after being asphyxiated for up to say 30 seconds even though she had a regulator in her mouth?
I'd be surprised if these matters were not discussed in some detail among the defense team and would be interested in hearing their conclusions. I understand that you may not feel qualified to comment or may not be at liberty to discuss some of these details.
Why is this important? Firstly, if Gabes testimony regarding those moments is inconsistent with what you would expect when a person drowns then it undermines the integrity of the testimony. You will recall this was one of the reasons Snyder was so dismissive of Gabe's testimony from the start. Gabe had said he saw Tina panic and then serenely sink to the bottom. Snyder considered these were contradictory statements. Secondly, it was widely believed that Gabe murdered Tina by turning her air off while holding her in a bear hug, allowed her to drown, and then turned the air back on. Stutz testimony as to how long Gabe appeared to 'have his arm around Tina' varied over the years. I've seen everything from momentarily in the most recent testimony up to 30 seconds. One of the Australian appeal judges even claimed that the postmortem should have stated Tina died due to asphyxiation rather than drowning. This again begs the question, how long does it take a person to become unconscious if asphyxiated? Was it likely that Tina would not have revived after being asphyxiated for up to say 30 seconds even though she had a regulator in her mouth?
I'd be surprised if these matters were not discussed in some detail among the defense team and would be interested in hearing their conclusions. I understand that you may not feel qualified to comment or may not be at liberty to discuss some of these details.
K_girl
Contributor
I can understand the painful feelings of Tina's family. They have information that could not be presented to a jury and saw the behavior of Watson, first hand. Much of it pretty disgusting, infuriating and suspicious. However, the system said there was not enough evidence to convict. There is nothing more Tina's family can do. They exposed Watson's horrible behavior and it has been discussed in public to no end. I do think that he should have served time and I'm glad that he did. Because his unbelievable arrogance cost the life of Tina. He was arrogant to push her to dive when it was something she did not want to do. Her dive instructor even tried to talk her out of it because of her panic issues and she replied "you don't understand, my boyfriend will kill me if I don't do this." He was in attendance at all her water training sessions, he saw her panic. It's baloney if he says he didn't. He was just irritated that she wasn't doing it right, yelling at her in her training sessions. He violated one of the first rules of diving - you don't push others into diving. I don't believe that Watson was completely unaware that he was taking his panic-striken wife on a 90-foot current dive for her first ocean dive and didn't give one minute's thought to maybe this was not a good idea. Even if she didn't have panic issues. So Watson says if he had known about the currents, he never would have done the dive. Claims that the current was heavy that day. They get in the water the first time, he has a problem with his dive computer, they get out. If it was that bad, why he decide to get back in the water again? He should know at that point there is a heavy current. He says people are talking about they are holding on, waving in the water like flags. Excuse me? WHY DID HE PUT HIS WIFE BACK IN THE WATER A SECOND TIME? Even with just 50 dives under his belt, I have no doubt that he has some experience with a feeling of panic underwater. We ALL have had that, especially on our early dives. I don't care where he did or did not dive before. Of course Tina is going to panic on a 90-foot current dive, what idiot would think otherwise? I guess the name would be Gabe Watson. Oh yeah, he has at least earned the label of idiot. Making her and her family believe he was capable of taking care of her was arrogance beyond belief. Makes him even a bigger idiot. Tina had absolutely no point of reference or the experience to know that she should not have done this dive because her husband was telling her she could. Blaming it all on the dive operator is such bull-hooey. Watson was a rescue-certified diver, arrogant in his ability to take care of Tina. Allowing novice divers to dive with rescue-certified divers happens all the time and you guys know it. Watson was the one who pushed her in harm's way and deserved the sentence he got and the discussion of his actions.
That said, the case for murder is over and done with and we all have to move on. I just hope for a few good things to come out of all this: 1) no one should think that it will be necessarily easy to get away with murder-by-scuba; 2) don't ever push anyone into the sport of diving or doing a dive they don't want to do; 3) always do the orientation dive, especially if it has been a while since you've been in the water; 4) no one likes arrogance touting skills they don't have, you could pay a big price for that; 5) if you haven't been in the water for a while, or you have fewer than 100 dives, you don't have the skills you think you have; and 6) if Watson is a murderer, he will think twice about harming a hair on the head of his current wife.
Do I feel sorry for Watson for what he has been through? - NOPE. And I never will. IDIOT!!!
That said, the case for murder is over and done with and we all have to move on. I just hope for a few good things to come out of all this: 1) no one should think that it will be necessarily easy to get away with murder-by-scuba; 2) don't ever push anyone into the sport of diving or doing a dive they don't want to do; 3) always do the orientation dive, especially if it has been a while since you've been in the water; 4) no one likes arrogance touting skills they don't have, you could pay a big price for that; 5) if you haven't been in the water for a while, or you have fewer than 100 dives, you don't have the skills you think you have; and 6) if Watson is a murderer, he will think twice about harming a hair on the head of his current wife.
Do I feel sorry for Watson for what he has been through? - NOPE. And I never will. IDIOT!!!
Last edited:
Yes Gabe was responsible for over estimating and over stating his abilities. They should have done more research but the reality is that they were both inexperienced divers and did not appear to know what they did not know. His behaviour in other areas has been reported to be bizarre. Both the reports from Gabe's supporters and his detractors have to be weight as a result of their bias. I double I will ever meet the man so I can not come to a final conclusion about my opinion of him.
I know that the role of DM's and Dive operations in the USA and some other areas are not the same as here in OZ. The fact is (admitted under oath) that the dive operator did not follow the LAWS, regulations and standards of practice imposed in the area they were diving. IMHO they carry a huge amount of responsibility for what happened. Had they not broken so many of those rules they would have picked up the fact that Tina should not have been allowed to conduct that dive without one on one help from a STAFF member. IMHO Gabe should not have been allowed to conduct that dive without at the very least a DM. I know lots of people who brag about their skills and number of certificates including Rescue Diver that I would consider too dangerous to buddy with!
When I dived in the States I understood the role of the Captain was to get me out to the site and the DM.. when there was one helped with moving things around, counted us in an out of the boat but that was it.
Every boat dive I have been on in other locations put a DM IN THE WATER with the divers. Divers were divided according to experience and skill demonstrated in the water and assigned a DM accordingly. The skill and experience of the divers dictated the diver to DM/Instructor ratio. These are the standards of practice put in place to avoid these tragedies as a result of the number of tourist divers who may have no idea of what they are getting into and be sorely lacking in the experience required to conduct the dive. This is the role of the the Dive Operator and DM in all the locations I have dived in OZ and PNG.. and it is not an EXTRA.. you pay for this as part of the cost to the operator.. some people tip the DM but that is not even expected.
I know that the role of DM's and Dive operations in the USA and some other areas are not the same as here in OZ. The fact is (admitted under oath) that the dive operator did not follow the LAWS, regulations and standards of practice imposed in the area they were diving. IMHO they carry a huge amount of responsibility for what happened. Had they not broken so many of those rules they would have picked up the fact that Tina should not have been allowed to conduct that dive without one on one help from a STAFF member. IMHO Gabe should not have been allowed to conduct that dive without at the very least a DM. I know lots of people who brag about their skills and number of certificates including Rescue Diver that I would consider too dangerous to buddy with!
When I dived in the States I understood the role of the Captain was to get me out to the site and the DM.. when there was one helped with moving things around, counted us in an out of the boat but that was it.
Every boat dive I have been on in other locations put a DM IN THE WATER with the divers. Divers were divided according to experience and skill demonstrated in the water and assigned a DM accordingly. The skill and experience of the divers dictated the diver to DM/Instructor ratio. These are the standards of practice put in place to avoid these tragedies as a result of the number of tourist divers who may have no idea of what they are getting into and be sorely lacking in the experience required to conduct the dive. This is the role of the the Dive Operator and DM in all the locations I have dived in OZ and PNG.. and it is not an EXTRA.. you pay for this as part of the cost to the operator.. some people tip the DM but that is not even expected.
Similar threads
