Watson's behavior and treatment of Tina's family before the funeral made Mr. Thomas "uneasy" but his initial reaction was that it was just a terrible accident. The treatement included the fact that Watson's mother was already on a plane headed for Australia when they only learned of Tina's death a full day after she died.
People react differently to the stress of a death. It IS understandable that Watson would want HIS support system asap in such a terrible situation. Look at how many times families lash out at each other in the situation of a death as each person impacted tries to cope with the overwhelming feelings involved! I remember the surreal situation when my kid brother was killed and I wound up playing middle man trying to keep the anger, pain and shock from causing irriversible damage to family relationships.
Tina's family was unable to talk to Watson for quite some time about her death and when they did, it was a very strange phone call.
I can't imagine that anyone would be in a hurry to get hold of their new in-laws and discuss the death of a loved one they felt you were now responsible to take care of. I wonder how many times the groom is told at the "normal wedding" "Take care of my daughter/sister/mother/aunt/best friend (fill in the applicable title).
Then the funeral director told Tina's family if they made any accusations, they would escorted out of the funeral. They had no knowledge of the status of the police investigation at that point and were surprised at the treatment at the funeral.
I remember an interview where Tina's family and best friend expressed concern about the relationship BEFORE the wedding. What are the chances that Watson was aware of that? What are the chances that Watson's family was trying to watch out for their grieving son? There can be a lot of behind the scenes things and history that can easily explain this.
I am not confident that Reporters always get everything right or try to present an unbiased position with fair representation of both sides of the issue
Sorry - it was one month (4 weeks, not 4 months) after Tina's death that Mr. Thomas spoke with the other divers on the Spoilsport that raised his suspicions about Watson. In the NBC news story, Mr. Thomas said that in his conversation with Australian police, he thought it was an accident, but something the detective said raised his concerns, but the detective wouldn't tell him anything.
"[Tommy] told an officer there named Glenn the brief details of Tinas drowning that he'd learned from his son-in-law.
Tommy Thomas: And I asked Glenn if that sounded like what he was told. And instead of just telling me, Yeah, it was a horrible accident. He said, Well, that's one thing that we'll look at."
Dennis Murphy: What did that tell you
That tells me that Thomas was already questioning motives and that the police officer was doing his job by not presenting a position on an active case too early in the investigation!
Bruce - read the sequence of events and the links in my post above. Watson started treating Tina's family like crap before they even knew what happened. He did receive their initial support, but he kept essentially slapping them in the face over and over again. Now you are accusing Tina's family of only wanting the insurance money. I honestly cannot blame Tina's family for feeling what they felt. Watson's mother is practically in Australia before they even learn of their daughter's death a day later after she died. Watson avoids speaking to them. The Australian police raise your concerns but they don't tell you anything. Then you are told not to make any accusations at your daughter's funeral or you will be escorted out when you had no intention of doing any such thing. You are skipping a lot of things that happened here. How would you feel if it were your daughter and someone treated you like that?
The discussion thus far has been very one sided IMHO. We are discussing the possibility that Watson may not be the repulsive inconsiderate jerk that the media have painted him. Why is it ok to ascribe negative motives to Watson, his family and Australia but to hint of anything remotely negative to Thomas is not acceptable?
I would never consider going as far as you have on Thomas family behalf. You were talking about defiling the body of someone you supposedly love in the most disgusting manner you could think of for revenge. No reasonable person would do what you suggested (as you suggest). You went too far and I lost some respect for you because of it and personally, I am quite disgusted. I can't believe anyone would support such a statement. There is no value in such a "shock" statement. I would never cross a line like that. Shame - shame.
Nobody is supporting defiling anybody. I can tell you that if I lost my husband on my honeymoon, was accused of murdering him and had an international campaign against me in the media and legal systems I would find that pretty unreasonable even disgusting!
If someone accused my son of the stuff Watson was accused of and I believed as much in his innocence as Tina's family seems to believe in his guilt I would feel that the line of what was "reasonable" had been crossed. Imagine for a minute how you would feel if you felt your loved one's life and reputation were being defiled/destroyed by an unjust campaign. Imagine you had to keep quiet for fear of some comment you made out of frustration being used against them.
So - it's not OK to accuse Australia of not wanting to look bad or spend money on the case. Oh man, I'm horrible, but ItsBruce's disgusting statement of what he think any reasonable man in Watson's situation would do - was OK. God - what is this coming to? All I've ever advocated for was a trial - and not the death penalty. There has not been a trial and there should have been. The judge who took the plea in Australia did not get all the evidence from the DPP.
Australia is a Sovereign State made up of elected representatives who have established laws and systems just like The United States. Both are inanimate and do not have the capacity to WANT anything. Our elected representatives may have motives but to ascribe them to the Country and therefor it's citizens (which includes me) is inappropriate. Where the citizens of a country disagree with the laws and actions of our representatives it is up to us to take the necessary steps to correct those issues AS WE SEE FIT.
I have read over the years that I have participated in these (Watson case)threads that Australia (therefor myself and fellow citizens) should be ASHAMED, EMBARASSED and so on. I have read posts that said AUSTRALIA was an International Laughing Stock because of this case. It was even posted that our next tourist industry would be for people go to Australia to Murder someone! Kgirl I am not saying that you personally made these statements but they have resulted in some Australians getting pretty fed up with what we felt was basicly Australia Bashing! Australian did spend a LOT of money on this case by the way! I don't necessarily agree with everything that is done within our Judicial System but I think it is arguably one of the best in the world! You obviously disagree with the way our Judicial System dealt with this case but it was dealt with and now your System is having it's turn!
I don't agree with or even like some of the laws and positions America has taken but I respect their Sovereign Rights. Pot, Kettle and black come to my mind here. It remains to be seen if the Parties involved or the Parties participating in these threads will find the American processes any more satisfactory than they found the Australian ones!
