Watson Murder Case - Discussion

[spoolin01]

There are a lot of posts to go back and read, but quite awhile back, I conjectured (based on teaching and diving with thousands of new students) that Gabe was dishonest in that he presented himself as a competent diver, when in fact he was very inexperienced and hadn't actually been diving in a long time.
When Tina panicked, Gabe was unable to summon the courage to save her. He was paralyzed with indecision and slowly made his way to the surface. He was rightly convicted of negligence and manslaughter, but not murder. She was talked into getting certified and doing the dives because Gabe said that he would take care of her. In reality, he couldn't even take care of himself. So he was a coward, a liar, incompetent, etc., but not a murderer. I don't know!!.. maybe he did premeditate and murder her, but I really doubt it, and in court a jury has to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt.

I have seen numerous people barely get through confined water training, get certified in a calm open water environment with much help from the Instructor, and then completely freeze when they actually do their first few open water dives on their own. I've seen Advanced Open Water divers overbreath their regulators. This can result in the diver inhaling water around the outside of the mouth piece and/or hypercapnia, which can lead to the diver becoming even more desperate for air and passing out.

In all of the reading that I have done on this case, the picture of Gabe that comes to mind, is of a big guy who fancies himself a hot shot. He compensates lack of intellect, skill, and charisma with BS. His story changes to protect his image and his self worth. The character flaws make him an a$$, but not a murderer.

It's interesting conjecture, but from what I recall reading - not that I can claim to be fully versed - there's nothing in the record to support those inferences. No one who knew him has offered any similar assessment, from what I can recall. For a guy who was incompetent, lame to the extreme, and wholly focussed on baseless self-aggrandizement before the ignorant... he had an oddly inexplicable affinity for diving. Despite his utter inability to execute. An enigma, this guy, to be sure.

 

[VeryRusty]

There are a lot of posts to go back and read, but quite awhile back, I conjectured (based on teaching and diving with thousands of new students) that Gabe was dishonest in that he presented himself as a competent diver, when in fact he was very inexperienced and hadn't actually been diving in a long time.
When Tina panicked, Gabe was unable to summon the courage to save her. He was paralyzed with indecision and slowly made his way to the surface. He was rightly convicted of negligence and manslaughter, but not murder. She was talked into getting certified and doing the dives because Gabe said that he would take care of her. In reality, he couldn't even take care of himself. So he was a coward, a liar, incompetent, etc., but not a murderer. I don't know!!.. maybe he did premeditate and murder her, but I really doubt it, and in court a jury has to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt.

I have seen numerous people barely get through confined water training, get certified in a calm open water environment with much help from the Instructor, and then completely freeze when they actually do their first few open water dives on their own. I've seen Advanced Open Water divers overbreath their regulators. This can result in the diver inhaling water around the outside of the mouth piece and/or hypercapnia, which can lead to the diver becoming even more desperate for air and passing out.

In all of the reading that I have done on this case, the picture of Gabe that comes to mind, is of a big guy who fancies himself a hot shot. He compensates lack of intellect, skill, and charisma with BS. His story changes to protect his image and his self worth. The character flaws make him an a$$, but not a murderer.

This is something I could see him doing. He is a pompous a$$. I apologize for that kind of character assassination, but maybe it will save him a life in prison. He is quick to anger, quick to spout off the most amazing comments, and is grandiose to boot. Perhaps he did just bluff his way into this scenario and now finds himself being tried for murder.

The issue that causes Tina's parents to push for a murder trial is because Tina told her father that Gabe wanted her to increase her life insurance to the max and name him as beneficiary. Tina's father told her not to, but to tell Gabe that she did. When Gabe first got back from Australia without Tina he wasted no time in demanding the insurance money that he was positive was due to him. Whether he is smart enough to pull off something like this or not I have no idea. But I can understand her parents suspicion.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

Thanks again for the link! A lot of reading but a well thought out examination that appears to be done with access to a lot of information that does not seem to have been publicly available. I can not imagine Michael McFadyen being stupid enough to publish information that is not based on facts. The report may be a bit verbose but well worth wading through the entirety of it! Remember all they need is reasonable doubt!

This information from the provided link sure doesn't sound like someone getting ready to murder his wife for the insurance money does it? I am still trying hard not to get drawn into repeating my (many) previously made statements on this topic.

Michael McFadyen's Scuba Diving Web Site

until Zillman (Gabe's lawyer) brought it up in cross-examination with Gary Campbell on the very last day of evidence at the inquest, no mention had been made that Gabe had decided not to go ahead with substantial life insurance on his wife, preferring to revisit the subject after their honeymoon. The police were in possession of notes of an insurance broker, Mark Hughes, that revealed that six weeks before Tina died, Gabe had indicated he would not proceed at that point and Hughes made a note to reconnect in December 2003

I think it is quite reasonable that following a death and expense of returning a body home that a person would want to use all available money to help pay costs

 

[bowlofpetunias]

For those in awe of Dr Stutz superior powers of observation from the link above

DR STUTZ'S EVIDENCE OVER THE YEARS

Click here to read a table that attempts to summarise Dr Stanley Stutz's evidence on the five occasions that he has been asked about this matter.
PROBLEMS WITH STUTZ'S EVIDENCE
I believe that Dr Stanley Stutz's various statements and evidence have to be questioned for the following reasons:

he said they got to Yongala at 11 or 12 but it was really about 10 (shows he is not as observant as he says he is)
says you cannot hear people speak underwater - you can, in fact I have had many conversations with my brother and others when diving together
had not dived for 10 years and had only ever done as little as 20 dives - means he was probably totally consumed with the pressure of the dive
at the Inquest he thought his instructor was called Roger - it was Robert - another incorrect recall of the event
said Wade Singleton came from the surface to rescue Tina - false, Wade was at 22 metres when he saw her
said he could see Gabe and Tina from five metres (they were at about 15 metres) but he could not see the wreck (which was at 14 metres)
descended less than a minute before Gabe ascended - as witnessed by Painter, McMahon and England - meaning he could not have seen Gabe and Tina together as Gabe took up to 2.5 minutes (he took at least 2 minutes) to ascend once he left Tina
Wade surfaced about 3 minutes after Stutz descended - again confirms Stutz could not have seen Gabe and Tina together
his descriptions of what he says was Diver 1 and Diver 2 (taken to be Gabe and Tina) can be exactly applied to Wade and Tina except for one thing - Wade did not swim away from Tina
his description of two divers ahead of three other divers is exactly what would have been seen of Wade swimming out to Tina ahead of the three divers in his group
a diver off at an angle could easily look like they were on their back rather than vertical
his description of a diver putting his arms under the arms of another diver could easily apply to what may have been seen when Gary Stempler was photographing his wife, Dawn Asano - the photo of her shows her totally vertical [which is not how a good diver dives - a good diver is horizontal in the water] and waving her arms about - Gary would have had his arms in a position when holding his camera that could easily have looked like he had them under her arms
his recall of what he saw seems to have improved the longer the time from the incident
WHAT DID DR STUTZ SEE?
I think that what Dr Stutz saw at the start of his dive was Wade Singleton and his group. The diver who swam ahead of the group was Wade heading to Tina on the seafloor. The female diver was Dawn Asano who was swimming vertically with her arms out [photo shows and endorses this] and probably using her arms to steady herself - thus giving the impression of someone flailing about. The larger diver who he observed putting his arms under the arms of the female diver was Gary Stempler when taking the photo of his wife and in a direct line with Stutz's vision - Stempler would have had his elbows sticking out and his hands out of view holding the camera.
If the two divers were so close that Diver 2 had his hands/arms under Diver 1's arms, then the eyes and face of Diver 1 would not be visible to a diver high up and off at an angle
The diver swimming down was Jarrod Fisher going down to tell Robert Webster that he could not descend further.
The diver seen leaving the bottom was either Wade starting up with Tina or perhaps Jarrod heading back up again.

 

[VeryRusty]

until Zillman (Gabe's lawyer) brought it up in cross-examination with Gary Campbell on the very last day of evidence at the inquest, no mention had been made that Gabe had decided not to go ahead with substantial life insurance on his wife, preferring to revisit the subject after their honeymoon. The police were in possession of notes of an insurance broker, Mark Hughes, that revealed that six weeks before Tina died, Gabe had indicated he would not proceed at that point and Hughes made a note to reconnect in December 2003

I think it is quite reasonable that following a death and expense of returning a body home that a person would want to use all available money to help pay costs

It was the conversation between Tina and her father that is causing the suspicion. She told her father that Gabe was pushing her to get this done BEFORE the honeymoon and she was too busy in the days leading up to the wedding to do it. Her father told her to not do it but tell Gabe she did. Plus the scenario you mention does not fit with what happened. Gabe went to her place of work and demanded the insurance money. He would not have done that if he believed the insurance issue had been postponed until after the honeymoon.

 

[spoolin01]

For those in awe of Dr Stutz superior powers of observation from the link above

DR STUTZ'S EVIDENCE OVER THE YEARS

Click here to read a table that attempts to summarise Dr Stanley Stutz's evidence on the five occasions that he has been asked about this matter.
PROBLEMS WITH STUTZ'S EVIDENCE
I believe that Dr Stanley Stutz's various statements and evidence have to be questioned for the following reasons:

he said they got to Yongala at 11 or 12 but it was really about 10 (shows he is not as observant as he says he is)
says you cannot hear people speak underwater - you can, in fact I have had many conversations with my brother and others when diving together
had not dived for 10 years and had only ever done as little as 20 dives - means he was probably totally consumed with the pressure of the dive
at the Inquest he thought his instructor was called Roger - it was Robert - another incorrect recall of the event
said Wade Singleton came from the surface to rescue Tina - false, Wade was at 22 metres when he saw her
said he could see Gabe and Tina from five metres (they were at about 15 metres) but he could not see the wreck (which was at 14 metres)
descended less than a minute before Gabe ascended - as witnessed by Painter, McMahon and England - meaning he could not have seen Gabe and Tina together as Gabe took up to 2.5 minutes (he took at least 2 minutes) to ascend once he left Tina
Wade surfaced about 3 minutes after Stutz descended - again confirms Stutz could not have seen Gabe and Tina together
his descriptions of what he says was Diver 1 and Diver 2 (taken to be Gabe and Tina) can be exactly applied to Wade and Tina except for one thing - Wade did not swim away from Tina
his description of two divers ahead of three other divers is exactly what would have been seen of Wade swimming out to Tina ahead of the three divers in his group
a diver off at an angle could easily look like they were on their back rather than vertical
his description of a diver putting his arms under the arms of another diver could easily apply to what may have been seen when Gary Stempler was photographing his wife, Dawn Asano - the photo of her shows her totally vertical [which is not how a good diver dives - a good diver is horizontal in the water] and waving her arms about - Gary would have had his arms in a position when holding his camera that could easily have looked like he had them under her arms
his recall of what he saw seems to have improved the longer the time from the incident
WHAT DID DR STUTZ SEE?
I think that what Dr Stutz saw at the start of his dive was Wade Singleton and his group. The diver who swam ahead of the group was Wade heading to Tina on the seafloor. The female diver was Dawn Asano who was swimming vertically with her arms out [photo shows and endorses this] and probably using her arms to steady herself - thus giving the impression of someone flailing about. The larger diver who he observed putting his arms under the arms of the female diver was Gary Stempler when taking the photo of his wife and in a direct line with Stutz's vision - Stempler would have had his elbows sticking out and his hands out of view holding the camera.
If the two divers were so close that Diver 2 had his hands/arms under Diver 1's arms, then the eyes and face of Diver 1 would not be visible to a diver high up and off at an angle
The diver swimming down was Jarrod Fisher going down to tell Robert Webster that he could not descend further.
The diver seen leaving the bottom was either Wade starting up with Tina or perhaps Jarrod heading back up again.

Really? Underwater talking? This kind of trivia and wholesale supposition (" if first you assume the eyewitness completely misunderstood who he was looking at, if follows that what he really saw was ...") impresses you? I've never once synchronized my watch or computer with others on a charter - do you? I don't know whether Stutz is credible or not, but there's nothing in this screed that would indicate otherwise.

 

[Divedoggie]

This is something I could see him doing. He is a pompous a$$. I apologize for that kind of character assassination, but maybe it will save him a life in prison. He is quick to anger, quick to spout off the most amazing comments, and is grandiose to boot. Perhaps he did just bluff his way into this scenario and now finds himself being tried for murder.

The issue that causes Tina's parents to push for a murder trial is because Tina told her father that Gabe wanted her to increase her life insurance to the max and name him as beneficiary. Tina's father told her not to, but to tell Gabe that she did. When Gabe first got back from Australia without Tina he wasted no time in demanding the insurance money that he was positive was due to him. Whether he is smart enough to pull off something like this or not I have no idea. But I can understand her parents suspicion.

VeryRusty,

Your post that I quoted(in my previous post), got me thinking about all of this again. You are the first person that I'm aware of, who has posted here on SB, who actually knows Gabe. My opinion of him is based on reading copious amounts of material and watching the TV specials. Your first hand opinion of Gabe is the same as my second hand opinion. Both are opinions, not character assassination. He seems to do a good job of that all by himself.

Strictly from a scuba diving point of view, everything that went wrong and tragically took Tina's life is explainable. Nearly all new divers overstate their experience and ability. The industry is plagued with lack of good training and with promoting advanced dives to divers with a lack of experience. Add that to Tina not being honest on the Medical Release, being grossly overweighted, no checkout dives, passive panic, inability to equalize, overbreathing, incompetence, not being familiar with new equipment, and flight vs fight reaction to adversity, all add up to a tragic loss.

From a human mistake point of view, Eye witness accounts underwater are suspect with no way to be sure of who is who, how far away people were due to refraction and 3 dimensional perspective.
Gabe's unusual personality explains much of the cowardly and bizarre behavior.

Finally, it sure seems like a premeditated diving murder would have been a lot easier to pull off without the huge trip to Australia and the GBR. Why not pick a more primitive place known for wall diving, strong currents and law enforcement with little resource and ability to investigate as a crime?
Closer to home, cheaper and easier to get to, Cozumel or Grand Cayman have Multi thousand foot walls where a missing diver would never be found.

I'm not trying to stick up for Gabe. It is just that there is SO much doubt, well beyond reasonable doubt, that this was just a tragic diving accident and not a murder.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

It was the conversation between Tina and her father that is causing the suspicion. She told her father that Gabe was pushing her to get this done BEFORE the honeymoon and she was too busy in the days leading up to the wedding to do it. Her father told her to not do it but tell Gabe she did. Plus the scenario you mention does not fit with what happened. Gabe went to her place of work and demanded the insurance money. He would not have done that if he believed the insurance issue had been postponed until after the honeymoon.

Doesn't make sense to me that Gabe would delay taking out a large personal insurance policy BEFORE taking a trip on which he is claimed to have had a premeditated plan to murder the person. Does make sense to me that he would try to get insurance money he thought would help him pay costs... remember Scuba wasn't covered in the travel insurance.

This also points out that Tina's father was encouraging her to be dishonest with her soon to be husband kinda makes me wonder about how honest he is in his statements too

Really? Underwater talking? This kind of trivia and wholesale supposition (" if first you assume the eyewitness completely misunderstood who he was looking at, if follows that what he really saw was ...") impresses you? I've never once synchronized my watch or computer with others on a charter - do you? I don't know whether Stutz is credible or not, but there's nothing in this screed that would indicate otherwise.

Yep.. trivial point alright... but they build up to create a lot of circumstantial "evidence" just like that used to build the circumstantial case against Gabe :doh:

VeryRusty,

Your post that I quoted(in my previous post), got me thinking about all of this again. You are the first person that I'm aware of, who has posted here on SB, who actually knows Gabe. My opinion of him is based on reading copious amounts of material and watching the TV specials. Your first hand opinion of Gabe is the same as my second hand opinion. Both are opinions, not character assassination. He seems to do a good job of that all by himself.

Strictly from a scuba diving point of view, everything that went wrong and tragically took Tina's life is explainable. Nearly all new divers overstate their experience and ability. The industry is plagued with lack of good training and with promoting advanced dives to divers with a lack of experience. Add that to Tina not being honest on the Medical Release, being grossly overweighted, no checkout dives, passive panic, inability to equalize, overbreathing, incompetence, not being familiar with new equipment, and flight vs fight reaction to adversity, all add up to a tragic loss.

From a human mistake point of view, Eye witness accounts underwater are suspect with no way to be sure of who is who, how far away people were due to refraction and 3 dimensional perspective.
Gabe's unusual personality explains much of the cowardly and bizarre behavior.

Finally, it sure seems like a premeditated diving murder would have been a lot easier to pull off without the huge trip to Australia and the GBR. Why not pick a more primitive place known for wall diving, strong currents and law enforcement with little resource and ability to investigate as a crime?
Closer to home, cheaper and easier to get to, Cozumel or Grand Cayman have Multi thousand foot walls where a missing diver would never be found.

I'm not trying to stick up for Gabe. It is just that there is SO much doubt, well beyond reasonable doubt, that this was just a tragic diving accident and not a murder.

Actually there have been a number of posts in this rather long thread from people who know Gabe including GABE'S FATHER! I sure don't blame you for not going back and reading the whole thing!

I have been trying not to get drawn in and repeat myself here but *sigh*

I think Gabe comes across in the police interviews I have watched and the transcripts I have read as someone who is not overly intelligent altho some consideration needs to be put down to the recent loss of his wife.

1) Many people do arrange insurance prior to a major change. When I worked in the insurance field we were told to use the engagement announcement and birth announcements in the newspapers as triggers to call people to buy insurance. The insurance company had a deal with several banks, Welcome Wagon, and Real Estate agents to trigger calls to people who had just moved or were buying a house to sell them insurance. Not surprising Gabe and Tina were talking about insurance!

2) Many people (often women) take up diving because of pressure from a partner or to gain favour with a potential partner.

3) Many divers who take a rapid succession of courses seem to think that makes them competent divers. MANY inexperienced divers overestimate their skills IMHO this is more common in younger males.. The question I have been asking since the very beginning of this was HOW MANY DIVES DID GABE HAVE? I even asked his father this and he didn't know or didn't want to say at the time. IMHO the newly revealed (to me anyway) information about dive numbers confirms my suspicion that Gabe was NOT even remotely close to being a competent never mind expert/experienced diver!

4) Many men are a bit macho about their ability and intent to "protect" their partners. Often this is overstated in reality and even in their own minds!

5) Gabe stuffed up big time but so did Tina. They both chose to do the dive. Tina paid a terrible price with her life. Gabe also paid and continues to pay a terrible price with his life but in a different way. I wouldn't want to be him and live with what he has to live with. IMHO guilty or innocent he will never escape this. Some will hold their personal decision about his guilt or innocence no matter what the court decides. Proven already by the fact that the decision of the Queensland Court is not accepted

6) Tina's family is painted as the victims here but Gabe's family are just as much the victims. Think about that a minute. You lose your new Daughter in law that most people agree they held dear to them... Your son is accused of murder... You see him demonized in the media around the world... you are pouring money and more into his defense... your inlaws are appearing in the media stating their "side of the story" but you are cautioned by lawyers not to speak to anyone for fear of harming "your" case!

7) There are conflicting characterizations of Gabe. Please consider who is saying what and their motivation! The "Thomas camp" including family and friends portrays a macho arrogant, controlling jerk The "Watson camp" including family friends and the paster who did their marriage counseling portray him as a caring person deeply in love with Tina. The truth is probably somewhere between!

8) An incredible amount of weight has been given to the statements of Dr Stutz because he is a OMG DOCTOR! I have worked closely enough with Doctors to know there are good and bad ones. They are only human with training in a specialized field and subject to the same errors and frailties as anyone else. I have said from the beginning that being a doctor does not give anyone superhuman observations skills especially when they are out of their element. Dr Stutz himself was an inexperienced diver ON COURSE! I will not presume that the good doctor is doing anything but stating what he believes he saw with the natural variations of time.

9) I hate to admit it .. but it seems to me that the Queensland Police really stuffed up the investigation. The Queensland Courts got it right in deciding there wasn't enough evidence to proceed on a murder Charge. I am concerned about the criminal negligence finding and the implication that has on other divers. Rescue training in all areas, from Police, Fire, Ambulance, first aid and diving stress that the "rescuer" must first take care not to endanger themselves and become an additional victim!

10) The "Thompson camp" has put an incredible amount of energy into getting "Justice for Tina". I am concerned that their justifiable anger and grief has naturally colored their beliefs and may have crossed the line to a vindictive campaign against the person they never liked and justifiably expected would keep Tina safe! I remember well the anger and pain when my kid brother was killed... given a spot to focus that energy I shudder to think just how bad things could have gotten had the drunk driver survived the crash! I am not judging the Thomas's here.. just tying to understand them.

11) I have held final decision about Gabe's guilt or innocence pending more information. I will have to admit that based on the information that Michael McFaddyn has been able to access and post I would not be able to say Gabe is Guilty of Murder beyond a reasonable doubt!

Here is the way I interpret the scenario. This is my OPINION only!

Tina took up a sport to please her husband and wearing the typical rose coloured glasses she believed her Macho partner would be able to take care of her. She was wrong! Gabe overestimated his skill and overstated his ability to take care of Tina to Tina, her family, the dive crew and himself. He was wrong! The dive crew believed Gabe and Tina didn't need "babysitting". They were wrong!

Tina indicated to "thumb the dive" Neither were competent to do a midwater ascent and they equated their descent on the line as "safety". They got tunnel vision focusing on getting to that "Safety" instead of going for another line. They were overweighted and making poor headway. When Gabe indicated to her to put air in her BDC... she may have dumped air instead. He would have put air in his as he was "towing Tina". When his mask got dislodged and he let go of her to clear his mask she was too negatively bouyant and started sinking but he was positive and started ascending. ( I doubt someone of his skill level would be able to accomplish mask clearing and get onto his Air II and maintain position in the water.) When he tried to swim down to get Tina he was in near panic and didn't let the air out of his BCD. He's positive she is negative and at this point he probably was breathing too much and holding more air in his lungs making him more bouyant. He abandoned the attempt too quickly to register on his computer.

Other recreational divers in the water would have difficulty determining who was who under water and distances. The drama of the event when they surfaced coloured how they interpreted what they saw during the dive. Their own personal biases and experiences coloured how they interpreted Gabe's actions. Time and media exposure further influenced their "memories"

Gabe certainly doesn't come across to me as someone I would want to spend any time with but I must confess I was rather impressed with his father in the conversations I had with him.

 

[Divedoggie]

It's interesting conjecture, but from what I recall reading - not that I can claim to be fully versed - there's nothing in the record to support those inferences. No one who knew him has offered any similar assessment, from what I can recall. For a guy who was incompetent, lame to the extreme, and wholly focussed on baseless self-aggrandizement before the ignorant... he had an oddly inexplicable affinity for diving. Despite his utter inability to execute. An enigma, this guy, to be sure.

If you read everything, you can piece the events together and piece the portrait of Gabe together. There have been many instances on record which would support the inferences.
I have personally seen novice divers react in very strange ways underwater. I have also seen many supposedly Advanced and Rescue divers do inexplicable things underwater. So, the conjecture is drawn from experience, from interviews with Watson, from actual reports, and from the many posts in this thread. In my first post in this thread, a few years back, I was absolutely convinced that Gabe murdered her. Now, after much more reading and contemplating, I don't think that he did. I think it much more likely that he was inept.

 

[Divedoggie]

Bowl of petunias,

It has been a long time since I participated and got caught up with this thread. I either missed the postings by the father and those familiar with Watson, or had forgotten. Still, with the newer info, it only reinforces my theory (which is very similar to yours).
At this point, I really feel badly for Tina's parents who have been unable to let her go, have sold out to the murder theory, and have seemingly become bent on vengeance.

Dd