alohagal
Contributor
Any news on the sentence appeal hearing? Did we ever find out what was argued in court?
Any updates?
Any updates?
Watson Murder Case - Discussion
- Thread starter almitywife
- 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
K_girl
Contributor
It was argued in court a couple of weeks ago. Decision has not yet been rendered.
Article came out this last week from the family still upset about the plea. Only thing new in the article is that Alabama Attorney General Troy King said the following:
"In Alabama this would be a capital case, and if we don't get justice in Australia we're going to pursue the death penalty here," Mr King told US television recently.."
Source: Dive victim Tina Watson&squo;s family warns on plea deals | The Courier-Mail
First, I am against the death penalty, but second, that was a completely stupid thing to even think about and to say. Australia could offer Gabe Watson asylum rather than return him to the U.S. to face the death penalty. The U.S. needs to get with most of the rest of the civilized world in terms of the death penalty. It's extremely expensive and the only purpose is for retribution and it has never been proven to be a deterrent.
I'm not even sure that the Gabe Watson case would meet the criteria of the death penalty in Alabama.
"Alabama - Intentional murder with 18 aggravating factors (Ala. Stat. Ann. 13A-5-40(a)(1)-(18)).."
Source: Crimes Punishable by the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center
I'm not sure what would qualify as "aggravating factors," but 18 of them?
Article came out this last week from the family still upset about the plea. Only thing new in the article is that Alabama Attorney General Troy King said the following:
"In Alabama this would be a capital case, and if we don't get justice in Australia we're going to pursue the death penalty here," Mr King told US television recently.."
Source: Dive victim Tina Watson&squo;s family warns on plea deals | The Courier-Mail
First, I am against the death penalty, but second, that was a completely stupid thing to even think about and to say. Australia could offer Gabe Watson asylum rather than return him to the U.S. to face the death penalty. The U.S. needs to get with most of the rest of the civilized world in terms of the death penalty. It's extremely expensive and the only purpose is for retribution and it has never been proven to be a deterrent.
I'm not even sure that the Gabe Watson case would meet the criteria of the death penalty in Alabama.
"Alabama - Intentional murder with 18 aggravating factors (Ala. Stat. Ann. 13A-5-40(a)(1)-(18)).."
Source: Crimes Punishable by the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center
I'm not sure what would qualify as "aggravating factors," but 18 of them?
I must say I feel bad for the family but I do not believe the Justice system should be run by the Victims but by people who are not so emotionally vested in the case. I have stated before I do not believe the family will see anything as justice that does not involve a guilty verdict for murder.
Like many here, I have my concerns as well but if we allow the victims of crime to control the judiciary we stand a greater risk of sinking into a vengeful society at the mercy of lynch mob mentality. Think of the number of times the "grieving family member" has been proven to be guilty of the crime! Of course I am not implying that Tina's family is guilty of anything other than coming to the conclusion that Gabe is guilty and not being able to see anything past their understandable grief/desire to get what they perceive as "justice for Tina".
We have not had a public trial with all the evidence available and can not declare this man guilty of Murder. It is alarming that people in positions of responsibility are coming across as so bias... "push for the death penalty indeed!". I don't think the man is blameless by any means but calling him "the scuba killer" in print is pushing it awful far in my books.
I find it astounding that people can declare that this single event "sullies Australia's reputation" and puts us "at risk of becoming an international laughing stock." IMHO these kinds of sweeping statements erode my sympathy levels for the people involved and make me question the advisability of taking seriously other things they have to say!
Like you K-girl I do not support the Death Penalty but I do support your country's right to their legal system and the citizen's right to lobby to have your legal system reflect their desires. I wish others would afford Australia that same courtesy! To be honest I am getting a bit fed up with feeling like my country and it's legal system are being judged as lacking based on a crime committed by a US citizen on a US citizen when we allowed them the privilege of entering our country!
Perhaps if the US is going to question the fairness of the judiciary of other countries they should have taken Mr Watson to trial first. As has been pointed out there certainly was time for that to occur since we took so long at our end!
Rant over!
Like many here, I have my concerns as well but if we allow the victims of crime to control the judiciary we stand a greater risk of sinking into a vengeful society at the mercy of lynch mob mentality. Think of the number of times the "grieving family member" has been proven to be guilty of the crime! Of course I am not implying that Tina's family is guilty of anything other than coming to the conclusion that Gabe is guilty and not being able to see anything past their understandable grief/desire to get what they perceive as "justice for Tina".
We have not had a public trial with all the evidence available and can not declare this man guilty of Murder. It is alarming that people in positions of responsibility are coming across as so bias... "push for the death penalty indeed!". I don't think the man is blameless by any means but calling him "the scuba killer" in print is pushing it awful far in my books.
I find it astounding that people can declare that this single event "sullies Australia's reputation" and puts us "at risk of becoming an international laughing stock." IMHO these kinds of sweeping statements erode my sympathy levels for the people involved and make me question the advisability of taking seriously other things they have to say!
Like you K-girl I do not support the Death Penalty but I do support your country's right to their legal system and the citizen's right to lobby to have your legal system reflect their desires. I wish others would afford Australia that same courtesy! To be honest I am getting a bit fed up with feeling like my country and it's legal system are being judged as lacking based on a crime committed by a US citizen on a US citizen when we allowed them the privilege of entering our country!
Perhaps if the US is going to question the fairness of the judiciary of other countries they should have taken Mr Watson to trial first. As has been pointed out there certainly was time for that to occur since we took so long at our end!
Rant over!
livinoz
Contributor
- Messages
- 4,129
- Reaction score
- 0
Well said Bowlofpetunias.
Political motivation quite often plays a part too in the stance taken by people in public office. If they are looking for re-election, public support, etc, it's an easy way to garner sympathy by pushing a "popular" line.
Political motivation quite often plays a part too in the stance taken by people in public office. If they are looking for re-election, public support, etc, it's an easy way to garner sympathy by pushing a "popular" line.
alohagal
Contributor
Quoted from Bowl of Petunias: I find it astounding that people can declare that this single event "sullies Australia's reputation" and puts us "at risk of becoming an international laughing stock." IMHO these kinds of sweeping statements erode my sympathy levels for the people involved and make me question the advisability of taking seriously other things they have to say!
Like you K-girl I do not support the Death Penalty but I do support your country's right to their legal system and the citizen's right to lobby to have your legal system reflect their desires. I wish others would afford Australia that same courtesy! To be honest I am getting a bit fed up with feeling like my country and it's legal system are being judged as lacking based on a crime committed by a US citizen on a US citizen when we allowed them the privilege of entering our country
Yes, very well said! I agree. And if I was fortunate enough to be born Australian I know this case would gaul me to no end based on what you said above. One case of drowning or speculated murder should not sully an entire industry or nation.
Once again...media driven hyperbole rules the day...I think it is becoming a global disease.
We all want our news...but where does one draw the line between news reporting and news making?
Anyway...when you get more news in your part of the world on this case at hand...please report it!
Like you K-girl I do not support the Death Penalty but I do support your country's right to their legal system and the citizen's right to lobby to have your legal system reflect their desires. I wish others would afford Australia that same courtesy! To be honest I am getting a bit fed up with feeling like my country and it's legal system are being judged as lacking based on a crime committed by a US citizen on a US citizen when we allowed them the privilege of entering our country
Yes, very well said! I agree. And if I was fortunate enough to be born Australian I know this case would gaul me to no end based on what you said above. One case of drowning or speculated murder should not sully an entire industry or nation.
Once again...media driven hyperbole rules the day...I think it is becoming a global disease.
We all want our news...but where does one draw the line between news reporting and news making?
Anyway...when you get more news in your part of the world on this case at hand...please report it!
Circumstantial evidence does not always meet the criteria of "beyond a resonable doubt". Prosecuters do not like to rely on this type of "so called" evidence because juries do not always see it the way they want them to. Ask Marsha Clarke from the OJ case. She had direct and circumstantial, and look what happened! A good defense attorney would attack the evidence to put doubt in the jurers minds. And then the jurers themselves come into play. If they have any predisposed notions, this is going to affect the case.
Personally, I think the prosecution made a good move and the defense a poor one. After reading what evidence they had and how they intended to use it, it is my opinion they would have dropped the ball and he would have been set free. And this with my thinking that he did it!
K_girl
Contributor
I have to agree that the rhetoric of the family and the Alabama Attorney General is in poor judgment. First, if they do want to prosecute Watson in the U.S., they are going to need the cooperation of the investigative agency in Australia and you aren't going to get that by hitting people over the head with a hammer.
Secondly, the assertion that victims and/or their families should have the right to veto pleas goes beyond reasonable and I don't believe that any such rights are given in the U.S., so why should U.S. citizens think that right should be afforded in Australia? However, I do think that the victim and their families should be fully informed and given the reasoning and explanation behind the plea by the prosecution. I also think it is reasonable that the original investigating agency should have the right to appeal a plea agreement to protect the rights of the victim. For instance, I think the removal of elements of a crime from the plea, such as a knife being used to slice the face of the victim is not reasonable. In this case, the Queensland police investigation assisted the coroner to come to the conclusion that Watson should be arrested for murder, but were not included in the decision not to continue prosecution and were left frustrated and prohibited from saying anything to anyone and no right to appeal the decision.
I can understand why the family is upset - but you have to find the right balance for justice that is reasonable for everyone. It doesn't fix things to try and swing things completely the other direction. It just makes it worse in a whole new way.
Secondly, the assertion that victims and/or their families should have the right to veto pleas goes beyond reasonable and I don't believe that any such rights are given in the U.S., so why should U.S. citizens think that right should be afforded in Australia? However, I do think that the victim and their families should be fully informed and given the reasoning and explanation behind the plea by the prosecution. I also think it is reasonable that the original investigating agency should have the right to appeal a plea agreement to protect the rights of the victim. For instance, I think the removal of elements of a crime from the plea, such as a knife being used to slice the face of the victim is not reasonable. In this case, the Queensland police investigation assisted the coroner to come to the conclusion that Watson should be arrested for murder, but were not included in the decision not to continue prosecution and were left frustrated and prohibited from saying anything to anyone and no right to appeal the decision.
I can understand why the family is upset - but you have to find the right balance for justice that is reasonable for everyone. It doesn't fix things to try and swing things completely the other direction. It just makes it worse in a whole new way.
The recidivism rate however can't be beat
Yes, even with those who were innocent.
Remember that a few years ago the Illinois governor suspended the death penalty after DNA results revealed that 50% of the inmates awaiting execution were totally innocent. Read John Grisham's The Innocent Man, which details the true story of an Oklahoma man who escaped execution by hours when a clerk working on the weekend saw his final appeal (which he would have otherwise not seen until Monday, after the execution) and told a judge that he thought the appeal had merit. DNA proved that the man was totally innocent, and a review of the process that led to his conviction showed that the DA and police had totally railroaded him and should have known he was innocent from the start. It also showed that they had convicted others through the same screwed process. Those convicted that way but without the DNA evidence to prove their innocence are still in prison today.
Similar threads
