Watson Murder Case - Discussion

[DandyDon]

Well, I have put batteries into things backwards, but never into any sort of transmitter - so I can see that doing so could cause a failure to transmit, which the receiver might indicate as an nondescript problem. I've called Oceanic Tech Support many times, sometimes on real Ned-in-Primer mistakes, and they have always been very helpful & courteous about goofy things customers do. I don't know if I ever talked with Adam White, but since he is a former technician for Oceanic, and explained under oath, the device will in fact beep (as Watson said it did) when the battery is fitted incorrectly in the transmitter - that's that.

Now if a buddy or someone said it beeped and I was trying to duplicate the problem, I would have to hear a beep - not see a flash. Whatever, I would review the online manual and would have noticed that there were two parts, which the police did not.

I presume that those police had enough tech help from experienced divers to know that they needed to place the computer in a container of water before pressurizing in the chamber, but based on the one error - I dunno?

 

[K_girl]

Well, there are two different descriptions of situations with regard to Watson's dive computer. If the battery is placed in the transmitter backwards, the display will flash. If the connection is made and the transmitter loses connection, the manual says it will beep. From the manual:

Page 12 - "During diagnostic mode (power-up) the DataTrans measures the battery volage level of both the display module and the transmitter to determine whether there is sufficient voltage to complete a full day of diving. Warning - If either or both of the Low Battery icons remain on display following activation, Oceanic strongly recommends that you DO NOT dive until you have obtained battery replacement. If there is not enough battery voltage in the display module to complete a day of diving, the DataTrans will either deactivate itself or not activate at all.
If there is not sufficient voltage in the transmitter to complete a full day of diving, the link icon and tank pressure of "00" PSI will flash on display, indicating that the display module is not receiving a signal."

Page 31 - Linking procedure. "It is possible that you may inadvertently move the display module out of the signal pattern resulting in temporary link interruption. Also, an audible alarm will sound once per second until the link is restored. The link will be restored within 4 seconds after the display module is moved back into its correct position."

The manual definitely distinguishes between flashing and beeping in these two different situations. Whether or not the prosecution pursues this - don't know. May not be helpful.

Source: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/5411863-post57.html

 

[burna]

Playing devils advocate for a moment.

There is also the possibility that Watson genuinely thought he'd put the battery in backwards when it wasn't and the computer did in fact beep but for a completely normal reason that perhaps he didn't understand or it may have had a one off glitch.

When the computer did something (beeped) he didn't understand he might have thought he'd put the battery in backwards to cause the problem or perhaps it was a way for him to cover up something he didn't understand so preserve the image of being an experienced diver.

Duplicating one-off problems with electronic devices can be very difficult and sometimes cannot be done at all.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

I am so glad to start hearing more information to explain the situation. It was the one sided aspect that was bothering me the most. I do hope that the Media Hype and external pressures didn't contribute to this error!

 

[Ayisha]

I have a feeling that the police testing and theories took place long before the media got a hold of some of the details.

If it appears that the available evidence is one-sided, that means that the prosecution and Tina's family have done a far greater job at getting their evidence across through the media than the defence has - or perhaps that there is simply more evidence on the side of the prosecution. I think we have discussed every piece of evidence or information that has been available to us, and have not disregarded any piece of the puzzle we have been exposed to - regardless of which side it supports.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

I have a feeling that the police testing and theories took place long before the media got a hold of some of the details.

If it appears that the available evidence is one-sided, that means that the prosecution and Tina's family have done a far greater job at getting their evidence across through the media than the defence has - or perhaps that there is simply more evidence on the side of the prosecution. I think we have discussed every piece of evidence or information that has been available to us, and have not disregarded any piece of the puzzle we have been exposed to - regardless of which side it supports.

I think bolded statement is sad indictment of the any judicial system. The prosecution and the family should not be seen as a team.. or on the same side. The family is too impacted by emotions and bias. The Prosecution should be unbiased and uninfluenced by emotion. Putting the two together is dangerous IMHO.

IMHO It is unfair that the Thomas camp has been so much in the public eye and media that some seem to accept their claims without question. Worst still ... if anyone says anything that even hints of not being supportive of them or questioning their motives they are likely to get "shouted down". I am rather embarrassed to admit the external pressure I was referring to in my previous post was the pressure from the family but I was concerned about the reaction I would get if I made that clearl.

IMHO It is unfair that the people with the most to lose the Watson camp have been muzzled for so long. Their Lawyers were wise in advising them to keep quiet and not give ammunition to the other side. It is worse yet that keeping quiet in an effort to minimize the media fiasco has made the situation so much worse that they are forced to speak out now.

IMHO it is sad that so many seem willing to come to conclusions based on such one sided information. I repeat what I have said all along. I will not conclude Gabe's guilt or innocence without adequate information. IMHO The information available in the public domain is tainted and therefor not adequate to conclude Gabe's guilt/innocense or the Competence of the Investigators or Judicial System.

 

[K_girl]

I think things are starting to level-out with Watson's new U.S. attorneys - they aren't so quiet. You have the recent article that has Watson's family speaking out as part of the title, and you have the recent revelations regarding the dive computer and transmitter. Right now, they are focused on why he should be released on bond. When they submit their motions to challenge double jeopardy and jurisdiction, I'm sure we will hear the reasons why they think they should win. It is entirely possible that they may win on the jurisdiction argument and then there will be no trial. We will have to see.

I agree that none of us are in the position to proclaim Watson guilty or innocent. Most certainly, Tina's family could be privy to more information than the public and probably knows more about the case than even the U.S. prosecutors. They made many trips to Australia and attended the Coroner's Inquest in Australia and have spent many long hours talking to detectives in the U.S. and Australia. I'm sure if you were to talk to Tina's family, they would tell you that they wanted to fully understand as much as possible about what happened to their daughter and they did not just jump to conclusions. You cannot say that Tina's family has based their belief that Watson should face a jury, simply based on what has been reported to the press. The Alabama prosecutor did state that they had more evidence that has not been reported to the press.

I don't intend to profess Watson's innocence or guilt, I will let a jury do that, if it gets that far. The only thing I'm doing is trying to figure out who might argue what. I think that is what most people here are doing as well, and for the most part, it has been a very good and respectful conversation and I hope we keep it that way.

 

[DandyDon]

I've been thinking about the dive computer testing. In an honest world, the police could have had Gabe present for the testing, and with him on hand when it failed, he could simply point out that they did not have both parts in the chamber needed for the test. Instead, the detectives are trying to poke holes in his story, testing with him not there - not really knowing what they are doing, and I suppose Gabe's attorney told him to stop telling them things - let them figure it out themselves.

 

[k ellis]

I cant speak for the police on this matter but I can almost guarantee you that they are not just poking the computer with no knowledge of the device. They will usually return to the designer of the computer and or someone who is qualified to know that piece inside and out and will have them examine it with them present.

 

[DandyDon]

I cant speak for the police on this matter but I can almost guarantee you that they are not just poking the computer with no knowledge of the device. They will usually return to the designer of the computer and or someone who is qualified to know that piece inside and out and will have them examine it with them present.

Did you read earlier where Barney was testing the computer without the transmitter?