Trickie Dickie 99
Contributor
Well, the defense will more than likely try to say that Watson could not have turned off her air long enough for her to suffocate - you claimed it takes 6 to 8 minutes to suffocate someone and if her air had been turned back on, she would start breathing again.
From Wikipedia on suffocation:
"people act normally but with no warning they simply feel dizzy and then black out in a matter of seconds as the remaining oxygen in the blood stream is consumed.."
Source: Asphyxia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It is unrealistic to think that if Tina did black out within seconds of being deprived of air that her lips would have been water tight around her reg and she would not take water into her lungs, suffer a larygnospasm and then drown.
You said that a person who was dead would be expressionless, as Dr. Stutz described Tina as having a fearful expression on their face. He also said her arms were waving about as she sunk down, waved less and less on her way down. Actually I think what Dr. Stutz saw was Tina had been incapacitated and was drowning. Here is what Wikipedia says about the symptoms of a drowning victim:
Eyes open, with fear evident on the face
Uncontrollable movement of arms and legs, rarely out of the water.
Source: Drowning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What Dr. Stutz saw was the evidence of Tina drowning, already rendered incapacitated from lack of oxygen. With the laryngospasm and probably already taken water into her lungs, it was too late for her to recover with her air turned back on. You say the prosecution has to make the jury believe Tina was already dead when Watson swam away - I say, no that is not necessary. The jury only needs to believe that she was rendered helpless and left to die.
Dr. Stutz says he saw that Watson had a hold of her and then let her go to sink to the bottom. That is not consistent with Watson's statement that Tina was sinking too fast for him to reach her and that was the reason he went for help. It wasn't just a simple statement, it was an elaborate statement that he made to police, describing how she was reaching up to him, begging him with her eyes for him to save her. A moment, as he said, he will never forget. Will a jury be willing to listen to that and believe that because of traumatic amnesia - he made that up to fill-in the gaps? Personally, it would not fly for me. He made that statement to police, not Tina's family. It will be one of the biggest problems Watson will face at trial, together with all of his other inconsistent and elaborate statements.
FFS, why don't you just leave this alone and get yourself a life; you are plumbing the depths of pointless speculation here. He's in jail, he'll be in Alabama very soon and then there'll be a trial and no doubt we'll get it ad nauseum across the media.
I suggest that this thread should be closed down as and when he's charged, perhaps before - there is such a thing as prejudicing a trial and in that light, I'm getting increasingly uncomfortable with the level of detail of the commentary on here.