Watson Murder Case - Discussion

[alohagal]

Last time I checked Foxfish was a he. LOL.

I have read McFadyen's blog and it was comprehensive. I'd recommend it to anyone who wants to become better aquainted on the case. There were some aspects that were still unclear and these were raised in the questions.

OOPS sorry Foxfish...my mind must have been seeing Foxyfish instead! Anyway...I hope that Michael comes back to clarify how he concluded what he did with your questions posed.

 

[Ayisha]

He plead guilty to manslaughter in Australia, right?

He did not plead guilty to murder. Just that he was negligent in his duties as a dive buddy.

He plead guilty to manslaughter and served 18 months. I believe it was called negligent manslaughter.

 

[Ayisha]

Re: Asphyxiation

...In support of your claim, you provided a link to an article that gives the opinion of one of the appeal judges on the cause of death....

...Keep in mind the comments by this judge occurred around that Gabe's manslaughter sentence was handed down there was a big outcry from the lynch mob who said it was too lenient...

You apparently did not read the accompanying posts from 2009 within that post relaying the last several years before that of how and when the asphyxiation claim had been made. All but one source pre-dated the Appeal by several years. As I made pretty clear, I was not going to waste my time digging back prior to 2009 and the much earlier original statements in the deleted earlier thread are not retrievable.

 

[paperdesk]

This was not Paperdesks comments. Paperdesk was quoting Clownfishsydney. Clownfishsydney is Michael McFadyen who wrote up the most interesting web blog about this case. Look up his profile for the link.

Thank you for the clarification alohagal. I somehow deleted part of the "quote" when I replied.

 

[Divedoggie]

Interesting points. On that basis you'd have to say that Gabe's response was pretty much in line with the instructors comments.

Do you think that Tina would have been aware through her dive courses of the limitations of her training. For example that it would not prepare her adequately for the dive on the Yongala.


My concern is that Gabe's manslaughter conviction tends to set a precedent for other divers and tries to force them to get involved even though they feel it may risk their own life. It also fails to take into account Tina's own failings on the day.

The main reason that I became so interested in the thread, is because it all goes back to training. Neither of them had any business being on that dive boat in the first place.

Dive Ops need to look at and discuss client's log books, not their cert cards. It should be company policy to do a checkout dive before venturing out into potentially difficult conditions.

Certification Agencies set minimum standards. A committed, caring Instructor should invest in his/her students and spend the necessary time to teach buoyancy, trim, gas management, technique, and self reliability much more thoroughly, and to demand performance in confined water and open water training. Maybe agencies should not pander to a public intent on instant gratification by lowering standards and making courses faster and easier. Maybe standards should be raised and more time be added to the process.

Inexperienced divers need to admit that they are inexperienced. This realization should be pounded into them by their instructor. Had they admitted their fears and concerns to the DM before the dive, history likely would have been changed.

One last comment about buddies. Buddies are equal team members. One team member should not rely on the other to help him make it through the dive. They are there to share enjoyment, to add redudancy in case of emergency, to equally support one another, to assist with entanglement, to help don and doff gear, but each diver should be self reliant and self sufficient.

 

[Divedoggie]

This story and this case have pushed and captured the imaginations of many people, divers and non-divers alike. We here on SB all have reason for participating or even obsessing about the story and this thread. As I read more and more, and tried to apply the published "facts" to my experience with new or inexperienced divers, my emotional response of "Watson is guilty", completely changed to thinking that he was quite obviously not guilty.

Here is a short summation of my hypothesis:

*Gabe enthusiastically talked Tina into getting certified.
*She was uncomfortable in class and on OW training dives.
*Gabe helped put her fears to rest by proclaiming he could take care of her and touted his Rescue Diver Cert.
*On Tina's only actual Open Water Dive preceeding the Yongala, she was in a familiar, calm quarry with Gabe helping her.
*On her first actual dive, the endless open ocean, depth, current, too much information, etc. had her near panic before she even entered the water.
*The first short dive attempt that was supposedly ended to fix a computer problem, more likely ended to control a panic problem for BOTH divers.
*On the second attempt, Tina was over-weighted, didn't add enough air to BC, experienced passive panic, and as she sank Gabe had too much air in his BC and couldn't dump it as he futiley tried to kick downward against his positive buoyancy. He couldn't decide what to do and as he made the ascent to get help was torn with indecision, guilt, panic, second guessing, etc.

*Tina drown as a result of not providing a seal around the mouthpiece with her lips and died with the reg in her mouth and air in her tank.
*When she was quickly brought up from the bottom, gas expanded and forced water out of her lungs. The gas was also evidenced in other parts of her body and attributed to the ascent.

*Gabe couldn't admit that he was unskilled, unpracticed, panicking and unable to save her. His pride couldn't take the picture that he was painting of himself, let alone what other people thought of him.
*When he arrived home, the distraught Thomas family expected some answers and consolation, and Gabe acted poorly. They thought lowly of him so he lived down to their expectations and acted lowly. As they blamed him(for not saving her) he couldn't take it and retaliated by cutting the flowers and other disgusting acts.

*The rest is known history. I truly hope the Thomases can let Tina rest in peace, and I hope that they can find a way to have peace.

I do have one big question still. What do you all think Gabe's current wife thinks of all this? That might be the most interesting interview of all...

 

[ItsBruce]

Judge allowed Tommy Thomas to testify...just not about the subject of hearsay about Gabe wanting to up the insurance before the honeymoon.

I predicted that a VERY long time ago. (See also #1707!!!)

 

[DandyDon]

I guess Tommy Thomas will now move onto Civil suit...??

 

[ItsBruce]

" Anyone can convict a guilty defendant. It takes a skilled prosecutor to convict an innocent one."

This mantra is familiar to anyone in the criminal law business. There are many, many innocent people convicted because lots of prosecutors are as crooked as cat sh#t, and jurors tend to think the legal process is clean and honest. They are wrong.

I'm not sure that there are all that many innocent people who are convicted. But, I would agree that there are a lot of people who are convicted on what is really insufficient evidence.

 

[ItsBruce]

Sorry, cannot reply now as going out to have a well earned beer and dinner. I think all are covered in my pages. Some comments the last few days from court sheriffs were along the lines of "This is the weakest case we have ever seen in court and we are sure it will be thrown out today".

If you stop in LA on the way back home, I'd be honored to buy you a second beer to thank you for helping show that the legal system really works. (I'm a 15 minute drive by street from LAX and there is beer nearby.)