Watson Murder Case - Discussion

[burna]

Interesting to see articles in the defence of Watson. We haven't heard too much to counter the accusations of guilt, but perhaps that doesn't make as good newspaper hype.

Interesting angle re; the artificial flowers on the grave, this is what has always influenced me the most whenever I have been wavering over his perceived guilt in my mind. I never bought the 'insurance job' theory.

Guilty or innocent I'm glad he has left the country and that the death penalty is not a possibility if found guilty in the U.S. Hard to believe he could possible get a fair trial though when he is already guilty in most people's minds, even mine...sometimes!

 

[DandyDon]

I suspect that it's bigger news in Australia than in the US, even than in Alabama. I think it'll be pretty easy to find potential jurors who know very little about the story even locally. In other states I think the typical reaction would be "Gabe who?" I see that there are Australian journalists waiting in Alabama to cover his arrival there. The story must sell well over there.

OK, fair enough.

An alternative view in the newspaper this morning.

Pretty good defense really. It does seem very questionable that he'd try it in those circumstances. And from this one sided view, I have to wonder if either were qualified to be in the water...

She was also, indisputably, a panicker. Another witness who had assessed her previously described her in evidence as "probably the most panicked diver that I have worked with before".

There was other evidence that just before getting into the water for the dive that killed her she was red in the face with wide glazed eyes. She was out of breath and "not at all comfortable".

Diphenhydramine, the medication she was taking for seasickness, has reported side effects of confusion, dizziness, drowsiness, fatigue, disturbed co-ordination, irritability and blurred vision.

Another furphy from the evidence is that as a so-called qualified "rescue diver" Watson should have been able to save her life.

The facts tell a different story: the last occasion on which he had dived in salt water, a more challenging environment than still freshwater, was more than four years before the honeymoon. His experience as a diver was limited. Certification he held as an experienced rescue diver might have been ego-boosting but was not worth the paper on which it was written.

It really makes me wonder about some of the boat-pick requests I get to buddy up when traveling alone. I had to dive with a former Instructor once the first day of a group trip who hadn't dived in years, who blew me off when I ran low on air before she leaving me to ascend alone, therefore I wouldn't dive with her again. Hours after the dives she took a hit at the hotel followed by weeks of ICU in Mexico and Florida. Where would I have been if she'd taken that hit after I ascended, then drowned? :shocked2: What would the witnessed said about me?

That group dissolved the next morning as we evacuated in advance of a super hurricane we'd hoped would veer off. I did one more trip with that organization to get benefits owed me, diving the first time with the group leader and two others in a foursome, losing sight of my assigned bud when he did a safety stop from a 30 ft dive and I didn't; could I have been prosecuted for that if something had happened? The leader's buddy suffered a heart attack that night and the two left the liveaboard for port then Florida; I guess I'm lucky I didn't get more involved in that one. My boat-pick buddy then couldn't make a decision when I asked a simple dive plan question; he went behind me to the new impromptu leader to request a buddy change and I got to dive solo the next few days until we went to port to hide from a storm. Glad I don't travel with them anymore.

Was this the first dive of their trip, first ocean dive for him in 4 years, first for her ever?

"He knew she had declined an orientation dive because of her trust in his competence and capacity to protect her.

I read somewhere else that Gabe wanted his wetsuits back from authorities. Were they both in rental gear?

Tina Watson's insurance 'measly', say US lawyers

Now there is the real focus to me. One story says that she had $30K payable to her father, only $10K from trip insurance to Gabe, but another says he hoped to get $200K - even that story does?

Don Valeska, head of Alabama's Attorney-General's violent crime division, however said Watson hoped to pocket about $US200,000 ($A203,811) from two of Tina's insurance policies.

 

[sydney-diver]

I suspect that it's bigger news in Australia than in the US, even than in Alabama. I think it'll be pretty easy to find potential jurors who know very little about the story even locally. In other states I think the typical reaction would be "Gabe who?" I see that there are Australian journalists waiting in Alabama to cover his arrival there. The story must sell well over there.

Not really, it gets sporadic coverage and it's slightly higher profile now due to the ABC doco. Most non-divers I know are only vaguely aware of the case and they certainly wouldn't know Gabe's name. Pretty much all the coverage I've seen is limited to the ABC with very short snippets on the commercial TV networks every now and then.

 

[ItsBruce]

Here is another thought: A criminal defendant has an absolute right to a speedy trial. It is usually measured from the date of the defendant's arrest. When we see a long delay between an arrest and a trial, it is almost always because the defense agrees to it. However, the United States Constitution gives a defendant an absolute right to a speedy and public trial.

I'm going to guess that Watson's defense lawyers in Australia were prepared and ready to go to trial. It should not take his Alabama lawyers too much time to get up to speed, especially if they get the cooperation of his Australia lawyers. OTOH, I doubt the Australia prosecutors would go out of their way to help the Alabama prosecutors. First, its not their job and I doubt they would be paid for helping. Second, it would make them look bad if Alabama prosecutors could get a murder conviction where they let Watson plead to manslaughter. Thus, if Watson were to demand a speedy trial measured from the date of his arrest, it is possible that the prosecution will not be able to put on a compelling case.

I should note that a lot of what was done in Australia is likely not admissible in Alabama. Alabama prosecutors can't compel witnesses to come to Alabama from outside of Alabama to testify. As a result, they will need to take depositions where the witnesses live. That takes time and if Watson insists on his rights, the prosecution may be left without key witnesses.

Another interesting thought: I've seen many a good case lost because someone tries to overstate their case. Overstating one's case makes one feel good, creates good press and it may intimidate the opponent. Often, it is done to maximize one's position during settlement negotiations or in making plea deals. However, there is often a backlash when one is not able to prove what one claims.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

OK, fair enough.

An alternative view in the newspaper this morning.

Thanks TD the thing that has left a sour taste in my mouth has been the total lack of any information explaining/supporting Gabe's Position.

Interesting to see articles in the defence of Watson. We haven't heard too much to counter the accusations of guilt, but perhaps that doesn't make as good newspaper hype.

Interesting angle re; the artificial flowers on the grave, this is what has always influenced me the most whenever I have been wavering over his perceived guilt in my mind. I never bought the 'insurance job' theory.

Guilty or innocent I'm glad he has left the country and that the death penalty is not a possibility if found guilty in the U.S. Hard to believe he could possible get a fair trial though when he is already guilty in most people's minds, even mine...sometimes!

I wonder Bruce if you can tell us if that is likely because his lawyer would advise him not to make public statements for fear of incriminating himself or damaging his defense? People can put their foot in their mouth on simple stuff that doesn't hold life and death implications Even innocent people can make themselves look very bad with poor choice of words .. or trusting the wrong people!

I wont second guess the motives of Tina's family... they are trying to find what they perceive to be justice for their dead loved one! The problem is that there is nothing to stop them from campaigning for a justice that they percieve but that may not be supported by reality!

The flowers... well pretty low perhaps... but if you had a campaign against you like Gabe had What if he was innocent of deliberatly killing her.. but feeling guilty for not aiding her.. doing his "manly duty to his wife"? I bet a lot of people might become resentful enough to remove flowers

Not really, it gets sporadic coverage and it's slightly higher profile now due to the ABC doco. Most non-divers I know are only vaguely aware of the case and they certainly wouldn't know Gabe's name. Pretty much all the coverage I've seen is limited to the ABC with very short snippets on the commercial TV networks every now and then.

That has been the case for what I have seen as well. IMHO a lot of what has kept these threads alive is the interest of Tina's compatriots. I must confess a large part of what has kept me reading and following the threads has been my frustration with well intentioned but often poorly informed/unqualified people judging the judicial system in general and Australia's in particular.

 

[K_girl]

Here is another thought: A criminal defendant has an absolute right to a speedy trial. It is usually measured from the date of the defendant's arrest. When we see a long delay between an arrest and a trial, it is almost always because the defense agrees to it. However, the United States Constitution gives a defendant an absolute right to a speedy and public trial.

I'm going to guess that Watson's defense lawyers in Australia were prepared and ready to go to trial. It should not take his Alabama lawyers too much time to get up to speed, especially if they get the cooperation of his Australia lawyers. OTOH, I doubt the Australia prosecutors would go out of their way to help the Alabama prosecutors. First, its not their job and I doubt they would be paid for helping. Second, it would make them look bad if Alabama prosecutors could get a murder conviction where they let Watson plead to manslaughter. Thus, if Watson were to demand a speedy trial measured from the date of his arrest, it is possible that the prosecution will not be able to put on a compelling case.

I should note that a lot of what was done in Australia is likely not admissible in Alabama. Alabama prosecutors can't compel witnesses to come to Alabama from outside of Alabama to testify. As a result, they will need to take depositions where the witnesses live. That takes time and if Watson insists on his rights, the prosecution may be left without key witnesses.

Another interesting thought: I've seen many a good case lost because someone tries to overstate their case. Overstating one's case makes one feel good, creates good press and it may intimidate the opponent. Often, it is done to maximize one's position during settlement negotiations or in making plea deals. However, there is often a backlash when one is not able to prove what one claims.

Thanks ItsBruce - I agree, the prosecution has to prove any claims they make in opening statements.

I just saw "Legal Briefs" on CNN - both expert attorneys agree that this case is going nowhere. The defense-oriented attorney said that they will never be able to get all the witnesses into court as well as full cooperation from Australia and he called Alabama's case ridiculous. The prosecution-oriented attorney said the case is based on hearsay of Tina's father regarding the insurance and it will never come in.

So, unless they have the witness or documentation at Tina's workplace as the prosecution claimed they have via one single newspaper article - there may be no case. We know that Troy King is gung-ho to try this case, but we don't know about the next prosecutor who is coming in to take his place. That person may not be as gung-ho.

 

[ItsBruce]

bowlofpetunias: If the case was so open and shut as the media makes it out to be, the Australian prosecutor would never have settled for a plea to manslaughter. So, perhaps it the bias of the reporting that has so bothered me. And, if someone set out on a vendetta against me as it appears Tina's family has done to Watson, I would likely react similarly to the way he did ... especially if I was being railroaded. I'd probably have the body exhumed and stuffed by a taxidermist and then hung on the wall. (It is Alabama, after all.) Then, I'd send photos to the family.

K_girl: Mr. King won't be the first prosecutor who is gung ho to try a case, who falls flat on his face. Actually, it will be some other poor prosecutor who has to clean up the mess. And, dropping charges could be problematic given the media hype and the fact Watson has been held for several weeks without even being brought before a judge to be charged. The Federal Civil Rights case against Alabama and King would be a wondrous thing to behold. Can anyone say: " Mike Nifong"? (Does anyone know of his fate?)

 

[K_girl]

And, if someone set out on a vendetta against me as it appears Tina's family has done to Watson, I would likely react similarly to the way he did ... especially if I was being railroaded. I'd probably have the body exhumed and stuffed by a taxidermist and then hung on the wall. (It is Alabama, after all.) Then, I'd send photos to the family.

Bruce - that is horrible, I can't believe you said this, nor can I believe you would have actually done what Watson did. Are you sure you don't want to take this awful statement back? If you go back through the record, it was Watson's family who treated Tina's family so horribly at the funeral and it wasn't until some 4 months later that they believed Watson had anything to do with it.

 

[ACES50]

K girl

I don't remember reading anything about how the Watsons treated the Thomas family at the funeral. Elaborate, please.
But, I think I remember reading that Mr. Thomas had doubts about Watsons story from the very beginning.

 

[ItsBruce]

Bruce - that is horrible, I can't believe you said this, nor can I believe you would have actually done what Watson did. Are you sure you don't want to take this awful statement back? If you go back through the record, it was Watson's family who treated Tina's family so horribly at the funeral and it wasn't until some 4 months later that they believed Watson had anything to do with it.

You're right. I don't know I'd go that far. But, I would certainly do my best to prevent the family from being able to visit the grave site. Imagine, if you will, how a reasonable person would feel if his new bride died during a horrible accident while scuba diving, and then rather than receiving support from her family, her family accused him of murder and sought to have him prosecuted. Now, add to that that her family did this because it wanted the proceeds of the insurance money.

While that is in the past, add to the foregoing, having his life and reputation destroyed, sitting in jail awaiting trial on as murder charge when there was no real evidence of murder, having to plead guilty to manslaughter and spending 18 months in prison to avoid the risk of a murder trial, and then having to go through the whole thing again in Alabama.

Of course, if Watson did it, I hope he spends the rest of his life in the worst prison one could imagine.