Watson Murder Case - Discussion

[Divedoggie]

As a witness, muscle memory from practice and 1000 dives does not improve the ability to testify as to what a novice diver without muscle memory and practice would do when panicking and under duress.

There are plenty of divers out there who have worked with 1000s of inexperienced divers and who have seen many things go wrong, and have seen how different people deal with those mishaps. The expert witnesses shouldn't be chosen based on number of dives, but instead based on the number of dives they have done with panicky, nervous, and often undertrained new divers.

There are plenty of DMs and Instructors down in the Keys who have 10,000 dives and story after story of incompetence, panic, passive panic, bad judgement, and so on.
In Key West, I once watched a man do a a giant stride off of a boat and go directly to the bottom. The DM was able to get the guy back to surface, but was having a very difficult time inflating the BC. Meanwhile the guy was holding his SPG and desperately trying to press the inflator button. It was impossible to convince him that there was no inflator button on an SPG!

Before the dive, the guy and his son were talking some pretty big talk about their cert levels and the dives that they had done in the past.

 

[boulderjohn]

While everything you say below is true, a well fashioned reply would mention two things:

1. While a buoyant ascent does bring an admitted risk of embolism, it will completely solve the problem of an out of control descent, which was what the immediate danger was.

2. You do not need to push that magic button to the point of a buoyant ascent--just enough to stop the descent is all that is needed. That is a basic skill learned in OW class--one that even new diver Tina should have mastered.

I'd almost be willing to pay money to get to cross-examine them.
"Have you ever heard of something called an air embolism?"
"Isn't it true you get one from ascending too fast or from holding your breath?"
"Isn't it true[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif] that when you start to ascend the air in your BCD expands?"
"Isn't it true that as the air expands a diver will rise faster if he or she doesn't dump some.?"
"So, just pushing the button isn't a cure all?"
"Its not like saying 'Scotty, beam me up!' is it?"
"if she forgot to dump air or to exhale, she'd likely embolism?"

The following are well reasoned responses a cool headed diver might make, not one on the edge of panic himself.

"Now, let's talk about sinking; if one has plenty of air and properly operating equipment, what is wrong with going to the bottom, sitting there and either waiting for help or deciding what action to take?"

"Isn't it true[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif] divers are taught that when something goes wrong they should stop, breath, think and then act?"[/FONT][/FONT]

As an instructor who has taught Rescue classes, I don't see the "magic button" issue as all that big a deal, frankly.

I have to admit that I am squarely on the fence on this one. I agree that something seems amiss. I agree that much of this looks like BS--he should have had no trouble rescuing her, IMO. On the other hand, I don't see the smoking gun of incrimination, and I don't see how he could have pulled it off under the circumstances. If you asked me for a way to drown someone in that amount of time under those conditions, I could not tell you how to do it.

 

[Wookie]

As a witness, muscle memory from practice and 1000 dives does not improve the ability to testify as to what a novice diver without muscle memory and practice would do when panicking and under duress.

I very carefully made no statement regarding the suitability of any expert witness or another, nor do I think 500 dives makes one any kind of an expert. I'd love to have an "expert" testify against me and have the expert only have 500 dives, fewer than 500 OW certs, or fewer than 15 years actively running a liveaboard dive boat. My lawyer would make such an "expert" look like a fool.

The statement made and the statement I responded to was that having 1,000 dives counts for very little when things go wrong. I disagree.

 

[Divedoggie]

I very carefully made no statement regarding the suitability of any expert witness or another, nor do I think 500 dives makes one any kind of an expert. I'd love to have an "expert" testify against me and have the expert only have 500 dives, fewer than 500 OW certs, or fewer than 15 years actively running a liveaboard dive boat. My lawyer would make such an "expert" look like a fool.

The statement made and the statement I responded to was that having 1,000 dives counts for very little when things go wrong. I disagree.

Agreed! I just wanted to clarify. I also figured with your years of experience in the Keys, that you likely had pretty much "seen it all" when it comes to dysfunction.

 

[Divedoggie]

I think that the "just press the button testimony" is misleading. The "expert witness" makes it sound, to a non-diver jury or media, like there is a magic button. If a diver or rescuer is not focused and is grabbing the SPG instead of the LPI, they aren't going to find the button.

Even with 4 years between the rescue course and no recent dives, Watson should have remembered how to inflate her BC or drop her weights. Maybe, he didn't think it was too critical at the time, and he wanted her to do it herself? As we know, small problems can escalate pretty quickly, and suddenly it's too late.

Even though I'm sitting squarely on the not guilty side of the fence.... I'm not saying that he is outright innocent. I think that this rubs most divers the wrong way, because it isn't how they would have done it or how they were taught. Most of us would have sacrificed life and limb regardless of being taught to not turn a rescue situation for one victim into 2 victims.

Watson handled it badly, but there are countless examples (some of which I have given in prior posts) of other people who have handled similar situations badly, but got lucky. The newlywed Watsons didn't get lucky.

 

[Wookie]

Agreed! I just wanted to clarify. I also figured with your years of experience in the Keys, that you likely had pretty much "seen it all" when it comes to dysfunction.

We are blessed. I think we (my wife and I) have the reputation of not suffering fools much, or most real newbs don't do liveaboard. I have seen a few, however. It's too bad, because the new folks we do get go from being so-so divers to very good in the space of a week. Something about 5 a day for a week makes the learning curve very steep.

Again, sorry for the off-topic.

 

[Foxfish]

While a buoyant ascent does bring an admitted risk of embolism, it will completely solve the problem of an out of control descent, which was what the immediate danger was.

Why is sinking to the bottom with plenty of air in your tank and the regulator stuck in your mouth a problem. I'd contend there was essentially no risk. It was Tina's response to the risk that was the problem. Again, foul play aside, it is still unclear to me how Tina died in these circumstances. It suggests there was foul play. The problem with that hypothesis is that it seems highly unlikely Tina could have asphyxiated before drowning based on Stutz claimed observations of her movements just before Gabe ascended ie. she was still alive.

McFadyen's calculations indicate that Tina's air consumption during the dive was very high and consistent with what you'd expect from a diver who was very distressed. I've had a quick check of his calculations and note that he has definition of SAC and RMV shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the terms. However, in his table showing the calculation of air consumptions, he reversed his definition, so that two wrongs made a right and the numbers appear correct.

The table does show that Tina's air consumption was extremely high consistent with her being in a state of panic. It looks to me like McFadyen has assigned respiration rates at the various depths by a process of trial and error and matched these to the total air consumption for the dive base on the tank change in pressure. I think that is valid but it is possible that Tina's breathing rate at the end of the dive was much higher than he noted if the duration of Tina's intense panic was for a shorter period, say a minute. That makes me wonder about the possibility that when Tina drifted to the bottom she had fainted due to hyperventilation.

In the postmortem as recorded by McFadyen, the following was noted:

- radiology showed "florid evidence of air embolism"
- a CT scan done later also showed "a large volume of air ... within all intracerebral [brain] arteries"
- it also showed air within the arteries in the neck and most other parts of the body
- the evidence of air embolism appeared to be a complication of the rescue - that is when Wade Singleton quickly bought Tina to the surface.

Is it possible that when Tina drifted to the bottom she had fainted due to hyperventilation and actually died as a result of an air embolism? I'm not sure what happened to Wade after the rescue. I don't recall seeing anywhere that he suffered DCS which would tend to argue against this possibility. Vomiting on the way up would seem consistent with drowning.

 

[Divedoggie]

Foxfish,
Very interesting. Maybe this was discussed somewhere back in the multitude of posts and threads?
Good thinking. I never considered this. I did speculate that she could have suffered from Hypercapnia or Hypoxia as a result of improper breathing, but didn't really consider the possibility that she had passed out and sank to the bottom where she was still alive. The rescue ascent could have caused AGE/DCI which is the real reason that she couldn't be revived by CPR back on the boat. Hmmm, really makes you think.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

In my mind I keep going back to this one bit of information that makes me think the murder for profit motive just doesn't work. Tina and Gabe had looked at private insurance and decided not to follow up until after the Honeymoon. It would have been normal to takeout insurance at that stage but they elected not to. If he was planning to murder her.. why on earth did they arrange to talk to the Insurance Agent after they got back? I wonder if the insurance agent will be called as a witness? If he was thinking that far ahead of killing her.. why didn't he make sure that Scuba was covered in the travel insurance. Just doesn't add up that someone who is cooly planning a murder would miss those two opportunities!

Dive Instructors and DM's I have a question for you. How often do divers hit the deflate instead of the inflate button? Seems to me it must be fairly common from the amount of chatter I see on the forums about it! I have to admit *she says with a red face* I have done it myself but it is highly unlikely I would make that mistake now... well unless I had an extended period of non diving and unfamiliar gear.....

Now I am sorry but I have been pretty busy and while I have read the links I can't point to the specific one that stated there was no air in Tina's BCD.

Assuming that is the case.. it supports this Scenario

she was overweighted
Gabe had her by the hand (or whatever) and was trying to get her back to the percieved "Safety" of the Mooring line.
Gabe while overweighted had put air in his BCD when he indicated to Tina to put air in her BCD
When his mask got knocked awry and flooded.. he let go
She started sinking
Without her drag and good bouyancy control he started ascending while correcting his problems
Gabe is stressed, task loaded.. decision making questionable...
Gabe too bouyant doesn't dump air to descend can't descend on quick effort
Tina too negative descending
Gabe elects to go for help abandoning the attempt (and Tina)

Bad decision.. we certainly know that in hindsight but evidence of criminal intent :?:

 

[bowlofpetunias]

I agree with a number of the posters here. Milsap and Snyder should not in any stretch be accepted as sufficiently knowledgeable as to be expert witnesses. I am not sure of the process in the States but when I was called as an "Expert Witness" the lawyer who had called me stated why he felt I qualified as an Expert witness.. then the opposing lawyer had a chance to ask some questions to challenge if I was indeed "Expert enough... or in the case.. too expert". That process can fail if the opposing attorney does not know what a real expert in the field is and therefor does not ask the right questions in "challenging" the expert status of the Witness. I suspect this is a double edged sword in this case. Since this pair were present at the time of the incident it could be seen as attempting to discredit them for other reasons

IMHO we need to always be mindful of the fact that someone might read what we post not only at the time of posting when they can ask questions about statements made but later when they can not. That is what makes me feel that accepting these two as "experts" and not calling BS on some of their statements becomes downright dangerous! I am glad that we have some clearly experienced level headed people here with the qualifications to be able to do just that. At least anyone reading this thread can make their own decision with appropriate information!

When I travel I have always found comfort and reassurance in the fact that I normally travel with experienced, and very competent divers whose skill is known to me. I have been on a few dive boats where I decided to keep a long distance between me and certain other divers due to their comments. I actually thought that would protect me from getting caught in the backlash of their behavior. Obviously I was wrong! I now know I may need to defend my "magic button" from someone who decides I need a quick ride to the surface to save my life! I also now know that there may be someone on the boat who could endanger my life (or freedom to live my life) if they decide in their "Expert Opinion" I didn't act they way THEY thought I should in an emergency! I know we are all fallible so the potential is there......