Watson Murder Case - Discussion

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!

Well, alohagal, you are forgiven. And so sorry to disappoint but I don’t know any of the people involved in this. It amuses me though; I’ve read several articles on this story and the comments people post afterwards and it seems like any time someone is of the opinion that this guy might not have done what everyone is saying he did, everyone else starts posting stuff saying this must be Gabe Watson, or this must be a friend of his, or this must be his dad, or this must be his new wife. Why is it that when anyone is of the opinion that this guy is some psychopathic killer they are not accused of being Tina’s dad, sister, or friend? Just something to think about… Any way, in response to what you say, I am not, in fact, “a disgruntled Watson family member” or even someone close to him. I’ve never met the guy and know as much about this as I’ve read in the papers and on forums…same as you. It’s just that in reading all of this some things popped out at me. While I find K_girl’s website to have the most information located in one place, most of her articles seem to come from the Townsville Bulletin (which seems to be a little slanted toward the Thomas’ IMHO) and they don’t have any archived articles past early 2007 available on their site so you can’t really go back and look at the early information about this incident. I have found CDNN’s website to be much more useful since you can research articles back to the day this was first reported. And since I have nothing better to do and have read just about everything published on this, I’d like to point out a few things.

First, I’d like to back up what I said about her family pushing this investigation on. The day of the incident, the first article CDNN posted about it stated this: “Detectives last night interviewed 50 people -- all of the passengers and crew -- from the dive boat. Police communications co-ordinator Sergeant Nick Sellars said there were no suspicious circumstances with the death and a report would be prepared by water police for the coroner. The incident was the second death from the Spoil Sport in less than a year.” (CDNN :: Mike Ball Spoil Sport Liveaboard Diver Dies Diving Near Yongala Wreck) Here is where I question your comment about “I think there were red flags from the beginning based on witness statements, police interview of Gabe Watson and the series of events as reported by those who were there that day of the incident.” No one said ANYTHING that day based on everything that I have read. It was being reported as what I said, a terrible, terrible accident. Now, I’m getting all of this from the media, and since we are believing EVERYTHING they say, it must be true (I hope you are all picking up on my sarcasm there!). There’s another article the next day (CDNN :: Mike Ball Spoil Sport Guest Died On Her Honeymoon) which stated “Police and workplace health and safety officers will investigate the death. The woman is the fourth American to die in north or central Queensland waters in the past 12 months: three were divers and one was a snorkeler.” Still no mention of foul play, murder, suspicious circumstances, nothing. There’s one more article at the end of that month (CDNN :: Mike Ball Manager Denies Negligence in Spoil Sport Death) with still no mention of anything out of the ordinary where the husband was concerned but continued concerns about possible negligence on the part of Mike Ball’s Spoil Sport crew, something that never got a whole lot of press from what I can tell. Almost TWO FULL YEARS pass without a word from him, from her family, from anyone as far as my research shows and then end of October 2005, BAM!!, there are articles with phrases like “And the family's frustration and ongoing grief finally erupted this week, with parents Tom and Cindy lashing out at the slowness of the investigation, calling on Australian police to explain why the investigation was not yet final and had yielded no results.” CDNN :: Cover Up Down Under? Still No Answers in Mike Ball Spoil Sport Death “The family's frustration first surfaced last October on the second anniversary of their daughter's death, when they lashed out at the slowness of the investigation, and called on Australian police to explain why the investigation was not yet finalized and had yielded no results.” CDNN :: Parents seek answers to daughter’s death on Mike Ball 'Spoil Sport' dive “And Tommy Thomas says enough time has passed and he wants this investigation concluded.” CDNN :: Investigation into Mike Ball Spoil Sport Death Drags On and finally “Mr. Watson has avoided media attention since the event, however Tina's parents Tom and Cindy Thomas, who have had little contact with their son-in-law since the accident, were in Townsville last month demanding to know why an investigation into their daughter's death had stalled.” (CDNN :: Gabe Watson: 'I tried to save Tina'). And it was that last article that finally had some interesting stuff in it. It was dated May 6, 2006. Here is where that pesky “negligence on the part of the Spoil Sport crew” thing that kind of got washed to the way side came up again and low and behold, “It has been confirmed that a Workplace Health and Safety report was undertaken following the incident, and that charges were laid against Mike Ball Dive Expeditions for breaches under the Workplace Health and Safety Act, to be heard in the Townsville Industrial Magistrates Court on May 16.” The other thing that I found really interesting in that article was this quote from Watson’s attorney, “Mr. Austin said his client was told before he left Australia in October 2003 that the investigation would take six months to a year before a report was placed before the coroner, and that timeframe had now been well and truly exceeded. "But no one has tried to contact Gabe in the past two-and-a-half years. He has tried to ring and email Townsville investigators about where things stand, but has had no luck, so we have contacted a Townsville lawyer to keep us up to date.”” Seems to me that the Queensland police were not investigating anything because they didn’t think there was anything to investigate, i.e. accident. The family didn’t “use the momentum of the investigation”, as you say; they WERE the momentum of the investigation. It was non-existent until they got involved. That is why I made the comment that they have pushed this thing from the beginning. The investigation never picked up any steam until the locomotive named Tommy Thomas got behind it. Just my opinion based on what I have read. And I just have to add this comment from one of the CDNN scuba forums about Mike Ball Spoil Sport and negligence because it amuses me - “Has anyone else noticed that whenever a dive operator in Queensland screws up and kills or nearly kills a customer, within 24 hours the Aussie press starts publishing reports attacking the credibility of the victim? That's what they did to Tom and Eileen Lonergan, that's what they did to Gabe and Tina Watson and that's what they did to Richard Neely and Alison Dalton. You wonder how much Dive Queensland has to pay to keep the local media on retainer and smear the reputation of foreigners who make the mistake of going scuba diving in Australia.”

The second comment I made was about people making split-second decisions while diving and wishing they had made different decisions or could go back and change something. From some of the comments that I read from the same scuba forum on CDNN, looks like some folks don’t necessarily disagree with the decision Watson made – (1)“Gabe had more experience, and he did the 'right thing' (textbook answer) on how he responded, and what he did that day. Overconfidence is what kills scuba divers. Becoming separated from a "dive buddy" is a violation of safety procedures for recreational diving. I'm afraid Tina died "as a result of a diving accident for which she was solely responsible." I know that may not sit well with the family, but such is life. No one put a gun to her head to do it.” (2) “First let's consider the Rescue Diver certification. Being certified to the Rescue Diver level does not automatically mean you can save divers who encounter problems, especially in strong currents, which significantly increase the inherent risks of scuba diving. The sea is boss and if the divers were separated by strong currents, there is little if anything the husband could have done to reach his wife. Second, divers are trained to ascend to the surface after one minute if they lose contact with their buddy. Isn't that what the husband did? Finally, most enthusiastic divers encourage their partners to take up the sport. So unless there is something you are not telling us about the relationship, your accusations that Gabe Watson killed his wife seem more malicious than true.” and (3) “Also, the rule of diving is not to go down to come up. Thats crazy. If you get separated from your buddy or they get into trouble, you give them 1 minute and you surface. And from the way it sounds that is what he did after she knocked his mask off. I know if I was trying to help someone and they even touched my mask or regulator I would be outta there!”

Lastly, you say that you don’t think it is possible for the Thomas’ alone to “hold [the] Australian justice system hostage”, but I beg to differ. When you’ve got articles titled “Father furious with sentence” being posted everywhere, people screaming things like “This is in no way, shape or form a beginning to get justice for my daughter. We are in total shock at what has transpired. What has happened is ludicrous . . . and an embarrassment." (Father furious at sentence for Gabe Watson over dive death | The Courier-Mail) and personally meeting with the QLD A-G office to implore him to appeal the sentence, you kind of have to do something or look stupid, don’t you? And then the A-G from the state of Alabama gets involved and says “"I do not believe the Australians are unjust people and I know the country doesn't want the reputation of the new Aruba," King said.” Can you really NOT respond with all that going on?

Is it possible that he murdered his wife? Yes. Is it probable? Not really. What I see is terrible accident and a distraught family trying to make it into something it is not. And the fact is that after all of this is said and done, their daughter will still be gone, they’ll still be sad and more people will be left suffering all because one man made one decision and it didn’t turn out the way he hoped it would. And all of THAT bring me back to the original question that I posted on this board. Based on the precedence that the Watson case has set, how many people will potentially try to save a panicking diver because they feel "legally" responsible to do so and then end up perishing themselves? Or how many won’t and will end up in jail too because of a “bad decision”? Like I said before, something to think about…
Diving Queen,

I think some of the synical attitude of Scuba board incidents and accidents have rubbed off on me. Only because you had two posts and no real profile. But that does not mean you do not have legitimate points.

You are obviously passionate about which way you lean with this and certainly have spent a tremendous amount of time pouring over this story and CDNN. They are known for adding their on flourishes and embellishments to spin their stories. (although it does make for fun reading) However, all of this has been hashed out long before on other threads. This thread is on another level of discussion here. I know BSEE65 was very involved in the discussion...and wisely so...with K-girl and Bowl of Petunias and Livinoz among others, prior to the manslaughter agreement. It was always a great and lively discussion.

Didn't mean to offend...or retry the circumstances of this case. We may have that opportunity again in the future if this goes to trial in the states. Now most of us are waiting to hear about the results of sentencing appeal. However, I still feel it is an overstatement to say that Tina Watson's family are the major force and directors of this pending matter, as if they hold the strings on a puppet referring to Queensland prosecution. I hold the judicial system in higher regard than that. But, maybe I am just naive. Maybe the squeaky wheel did get the grease, but don't think they drove away with the whole car!

I know stupid analogy. Forgive me. I do like different points of view and look forward to hearing more of your viewpoints. Welcome. And it is refreshing to look back on what really did start this whole thing. It has been a while since I really reviewed how it all came out. And we did not get the proper perspective by any means. It certainly was media driven no doubt about it. Makes a darn good media story...and we know how perverted the media can be. Believe me I am no fan of that entity.

That is why so many of us looked forward to the trial that never happened. It feels like a rip off to tell you the truth. If Gabe Watson is truly innocent of only failing to rescue his bride...he will have to live with the fact that so many people will think he is guilty of pre-meditated murder no matter what the courts rulings say. He will likely never be able to live it down, especially in his own hometown.

Glad to have you on board. And enjoyed your clever way to get your "links" in!
 
Last edited:
But that aside, how does prosecutorial misconduct equate in this case? I have not seen nor heard of any charges of prosecutorial misconduct here. So why are we talking about this?

Th point was not prosecutorial misconduct. I was replying to another post in which the poster said he did not have specific incidents at hand but knew that people had been convicted of crimes of which they were not guilty and would have jumped at the chance to plead guilty to a lesser charge (of which they were also not guilty) if they had had the chance.
 
Hi Diving Queen. I read your post above differently and certainly didn't think you were related somehow to the families involved. Just to let you know CDNN has a pretty bad reputation around here with quite a few people for poor reporting. Also the fact that most of our information regarding this case comes from media reports, etc, has been dealt with in an earlier thread on Watson as well as posts in this thread. The Judge's sentencing remarks are posted here http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/4477334-post229.html and we are awaiting the Appeal results.

livinoz, as you might imagine from the book I posted on here last night :wink:, I am well aware of where this case currently stands. I, as all of you, am anxiously awaiting the appellate court's decision. As I said before, I'm new to this board and was responding to someone else’s recent post when it was mentioned that I must know or be a part of the Watson family. I was just defending my position in my last, very long post. Apparently, I'm in the minority with the way I'm leaning on this case. As far as CDNN's reputation, I don't find them to be any worse than any of the rest of them. There are inconsistencies and flat out lies in just about every media report out there today. Sorry if I'm rehashing old stuff...
 
livinoz, as you might imagine from the book I posted on here last night :wink:, I am well aware of where this case currently stands. I, as all of you, am anxiously awaiting the appellate court's decision. As I said before, I'm new to this board and was responding to someone else’s recent post when it was mentioned that I must know or be a part of the Watson family. I was just defending my position in my last, very long post. Apparently, I'm in the minority with the way I'm leaning on this case. As far as CDNN's reputation, I don't find them to be any worse than any of the rest of them. There are inconsistencies and flat out lies in just about every media report out there today. Sorry if I'm rehashing old stuff...

Without quoting your entire book from a previous post, a rescue diver with his hands on his buddy diver in distress should be able to do something. At a minimium, there should be some attempt to reach the surface. It sounded from Watson's description that he lost his grip on her because she got too heavy, and then decided to run off for help. A number of experienced divers addressed the concept of "too heavy" under water, and there was no "buddy separation" in the traditional sense. The visibility that day was much greater than the separation of the divers ever became before he actively left the scene.

I have seen several discussions here start out reviewing an incident and then float toward hypothetical and generic practices. Often it's the case of someone coming into a discussion late and not reading the majority of the thread. Any concept of buddy separation applied to this seems like it would have come from this arena. To give Watson the benefit of the doubt, Tina was in distress and, once he let go of her, sinking. He never lost sight of her, she just got out of his reach. There's no reason in the world why he shouldn't have been able to vent some air and get down to her for another attempt to assist or bring her to the surface. He was not in any trouble or low on gas. He was accounted an able swimmer and trained at least through rescue.

Since he was observed in close contact with Tina for some period of time, the "bear hug", he should have been able to attempt some sort of action to assist her. It was observed that there was no attempt to share air, if breathing was her problem. Since she asphyxiated with her regulator still in her mouth and a full tank of gas, it's hard to understand how she wasn't able to be made bouyant during the contact and no air was shared. If she was really in respiratory distress at that point, she could have had some sort of bad mix that was the source of her problems. At least, Watson should have thought so.

Could he be that incompetent? It's possible. It's also possible that he chose a path that would lead to Tina's death. For your comment that he was "probably not" a murderer, I can't see where you could draw that conclusion based upon the provided evidence. Maybe, in a legal sense, there isn't beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence that he killed her, but there is more than just a rant from half a world away to suggest it was possible. In fact, I'd say it was more than just possible, but a reasonable explanation for the events as they are known. Objectively, it's at least as reasonable an explanation as the one that the courts accepted.

Factually, I don't see us getting any closer to "the truth". If it was an accident, we'll never know more. If it wasn't, Watson could admit that he killed her at some point in the future. Other than that, I don't see any more facts coming to light.
 
Thanks for the links Diving Queen. It was interesting to revisit the beginning as alohagal pointed out it has been a long and interesting topic of discussion.

I haven't been saying much here recently as I don't really feel I would be doing anything but repeating myself.

No matter what the outcome:

There will be no "Justice" for Tina. Her life will still be tragically short.

There will be no "Justice" for Tina's loved ones. They will still be angry. Anger is one of the 5 stages of Grief according to Elizabet Kubla-Ross's Pioneering work on Death/Dying and Grief/Grieving. IMHO their natural anger can not be resolved by legal profession but by another profession entirely. I hope they will find the help they need... Anger can turn to hate that destroys from the inside.

There will be no "Justice" for Gabe's loved ones. They are victims as well. They will live with the 'stigma" and the emotional trauma of this event.

There will be no "Justice" for Gabe. His role in Tina's death was it a result of a bad decision based on incompetence, panic or an opportunistic murder? He will never escape the whispers and stares that will trigger memories. I would not want to live in his skin!

The Judicial System can only apply laws in an effort to deter antisocial behavior and lock up those who are dangers to society. There is no perfect judicial system, political system or society. There never will be. We still need to do our best to develop, enforce and uphold what we have. I will let those more knowledgeable than I am in these areas do their job until it is clear to me that I can/should be doing more. *puts away soap box*

Thanks everyone for a very interesting and mind expanding discussion.
 
livinoz, as you might imagine from the book I posted on here last night :wink:, I am well aware of where this case currently stands. I, as all of you, am anxiously awaiting the appellate court's decision. As I said before, I'm new to this board and was responding to someone else’s recent post when it was mentioned that I must know or be a part of the Watson family. I was just defending my position in my last, very long post. Apparently, I'm in the minority with the way I'm leaning on this case. As far as CDNN's reputation, I don't find them to be any worse than any of the rest of them. There are inconsistencies and flat out lies in just about every media report out there today. Sorry if I'm rehashing old stuff...
I liked your book!
 
Diving Queen: I, too, liked your book. Very impressive job of research.

As I see it, there were some "red flags" in the information developed during the initial investigation. I think the authorities would have been remiss if they had not investigated further. Now, the fact that there were "red flags" does not mean there was actually a case. And, I would guess that the authorities ultimately concluded that they did not have sufficient evidence to charge Watson with murder or take the case to trial. However, it seems to me that Tina's family may have kept the authorities from closing it. Often, a case will take on a life of its own and I'm guessing that when the prosecution was faces with actually having to put on a case, it decided discretion was the better part of valor and accepted a plea to manslaughter. Do I have evidence of this? Not really. It is my instinct ... and I know how often instinct is wrong and how it can often cloud one's judgment.
 
Diving Queen - Livinoz and I are on the same page here. CDNN's reporting is highly questionable and has a poor reputation on this forum long before this case. And because of that, I avoided using them as a reference on my blog. Police investigations sometimes do take years. It is not surprising that the case was initially thought to be an accident as murder-by-scuba is an extremely rare occurrence. But I would say by the police questioning in the Watson statements within days of Tina's death, did indicate to me that they had suspicions. And the more he talked, the worse it got. As to what other witnesses on the scene witnessed on that particular date and told the police, I don't believe anyone has that information. I saw a program about the solving of a cold case where the police had a suspect for years, but not the evidence. It was the mother of the victim who persisted with the case and gathered the evidence they needed. And the evidence was definitive with DNA. I can't fault a family who tries to pursue justice in the face of an investigation that is so complex, that the police and prosecution don't seem to want to deal with it. The years to me, seem to indicate that this family was patiently waiting for the police to do their job. I don't know why you have such harsh feelings for Tina's family, it seems to go overboard and I suspect there is some personal reason behind it.
 
First, I’d like to back up what I said about her family pushing this investigation on. The day of the incident, the first article CDNN posted about it stated this: “Detectives last night interviewed 50 people -- all of the passengers and crew -- from the dive boat. Police communications co-ordinator Sergeant Nick Sellars said there were no suspicious circumstances with the death and a report would be prepared by water police for the coroner. The incident was the second death from the Spoil Sport in less than a year.”

If I were the police, I would give absolutely no indication of any suspicion of Watson to the media for two reasons: 1) this was the day of the incident and you do not make decisions that quickly, you start with an assumption of an accident; and 2) if the other divers on the boat gave me reason to suspect him, I would want him to talk. Therefore, I would want him to believe that I thought it was an accident. Would seem that strategy worked exceedingly well and these kinds of strategies are used all the time.
 
Diving Queen: I, too, liked your book. Very impressive job of research.

As I see it, there were some "red flags" in the information developed during the initial investigation. I think the authorities would have been remiss if they had not investigated further. Now, the fact that there were "red flags" does not mean there was actually a case. And, I would guess that the authorities ultimately concluded that they did not have sufficient evidence to charge Watson with murder or take the case to trial. However, it seems to me that Tina's family may have kept the authorities from closing it. Often, a case will take on a life of its own and I'm guessing that when the prosecution was faces with actually having to put on a case, it decided discretion was the better part of valor and accepted a plea to manslaughter. Do I have evidence of this? Not really. It is my instinct ... and I know how often instinct is wrong and how it can often cloud one's judgment.

ItsBruce, you took the words RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH! I think you said what I was wanting to say better than I said it. Bravo!

I've read the Coroner’s Findings and Decision http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/Watson20080620.pdf and from what I've read, it really looks like the information obtained from the 65 + "witnesses" contained very little hard evidence, and most of that was circumstantial. The problem with the Coronial Inquest (any coronial inquest, really) is that a huge amount of hearsay is allowed to be admitted; so basically, the majority of the testimony provided during the inquest that ultimately gained the murder charge would not have been admissible during the actual trial. The only thing they would have been able to present at that time was hard evidence and as far as I can see, there never was a "smoking gun" in this case. Looks like to me the DPP's office decided something was better than nothing and hoped to make everyone happy by accepting the manslaughter plea. Unfortunately, it looks like it didn't make anyone happy. That's why we are still discussing it today and continue to patiently wait for the appellate judges’ decision.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom