Watson Murder Case - Discussion

[Ayisha]

I don't take McFadyen's views as gospel. I have read many statements that he has made within his blog that directly contradict the published information that we have been privy to. K-girl has also refuted some of the information and timelines that he has put forth. I don't even know what entitles McFadyen to be an expert witness beyond the number of dives he's done. Does anyone know what his qualifications are?

 

[Foxfish]

I don't take McFadyen's views as gospel. I have read many statements that he has made within his blog that directly contradict the published information that we have been privy to. K-girl has also refuted some of the information and timelines that he has put forth. I don't even know what entitles McFadyen to be an expert witness beyond the number of dives he's done. Does anyone know what his qualifications are?

From my perspective, his website is one of the best sources of information I've seen on the case. His sources appear at the end of the site and include a number of court and police records that most would not be able to access. I agree it is not the final word on the matter but it appears to be the result of a very thorough analysis and he has gone to great lengths to present the facts clearly and completely. It also happens to challenge many of the popular ideas about the case. It is a lot more informative that most of the emotive reporting in the media. If you can direct me to a source of information that is on a par with McFadyen's from the other perspective I'd be interested.

Not sure about McFadyen's academic qualifications. I think his understanding of physics is shaky. He is obviously an experienced and avid diver. I believe he can read and write. It appears that he is involved in rescue work as part of his 'real job'. Michael McFadyen's Scuba Diving Web Site

 

[Divedoggie]

From my perspective, his website is one of the best sources of information I've seen on the case. His sources appear at the end of the site and include a number of court and police records that most would not be able to access. I agree it is not the final word on the matter but it appears to be the result of a very thorough analysis and he has gone to great lengths to present the facts clearly and completely. It also happens to challenge many of the popular ideas about the case. It is a lot more informative that most of the emotive reporting in the media. If you can direct me to a source of information that is on a par with McFadyen's from the other perspective I'd be interested.

Not sure about McFadyen's academic qualifications. I think his understanding of physics is shaky. He is obviously an experienced and avid diver. I believe he can read and write. It appears that he is involved in rescue work as part of his 'real job'. Michael McFadyen's Scuba Diving Web Site

Yes, I agree and will add a little, since I was working on it when you posted!
As far as being an expert, the only thing that I see lacking is work with many new students. Seeing many new divers, the mistakes that they make, how they react to those mistakes, and how they handle stress IMO is key in understanding what happened to the Watsons.

He has a broad range of experience in different conditions and diving is obviously his great passion. He has had access to a lot of information that would be difficult for most of us to get our hands on. He has taken the time to do research from haphazard sources and arranged it in a more concise presentable form. He has at least, attempted scientific analysis.

Pop culture has nick named Watson the Honeymoon Murderer and most information released from the media has a bias that tries to nail him even harder. As a convert, I suppose that I'm the worst kind of of believer (or disbeliever). I just don't believe or buy the prosecution's theory and allegations. In fact I find it extremely far fetched.
McFadyen has a much more solid platform that doesn't try to appeal to the emotions of those who feel for poor Tina and her family. He doesn't have a dog in the fight, and neither do any of us who are thinking that Watson is not guilty. Sometimes when a person steps away from looking at the paint strokes, and steps back, the entire picture comes into focus. I feel like McFadyen has done that.

 

[ItsBruce]

Generally for purposes of a legal proceeding, an expert is anyone with knowledge, experience or training beyond that of ordinary laypersons. An expert is generally permitted to give an opinion if it will assist the trier of fact, i.e. jury, to understand a given matter. However, an opinion must be based on generally accepted scientific principles.

Air consumption calculations are generally beyond the experience of ordinary laypersons, and are based on generally accepted scientific principles.

Regardless of contradictions about facts on which McFadyen relied, I believe he qualifies as an expert and will be allowed to testify as to his opinion.

I hope the defense thinks to bring in a physicist to do air consumption calculations to support McFadyen's conclusions.

I also hope the defense brings in a highly experienced instructor to explain how new divers tend to react and to explain Tina's lack of proper training and experience and how these can explain a lot of what appears to have happened. Such an instructor could also address Watson's seeming inability to act like one would like to see a rescue certified diver act. Heaven knows that there seem to be plenty of qualified experts around here.

 

[barbaroonie]

I'm sorry if this has been covered ad nauseum in earlier threads, and feel free to refer me back there (hard to search). Regardless of guilt or innocence, training or experience, what the heck was this (well established) boat doing not conducting a careful checkout dive before dumping these people onto a wreck in 100' of water? And even if they did, why was the very first dive on a wreck, where it was likely that their dive guides would be unable to keep an effective eye out for the size group they had on board? I know they paid a fine, but seriously. I've dived at least 12 liveaboards in some pretty far flung places and NEVER has there not been a check out dive in calm, clear waters to establish fitness to dive. Anyone?

-Barb

 

[barbaroonie]

I'm sorry if this has been covered ad nauseum in earlier threads, and feel free to refer me back there (hard to search). Regardless of guilt or innocence, training or experience, what the heck was this (well established) boat doing not conducting a careful checkout dive before dumping these people onto a wreck in 100' of water? And even if they did, why was the very first dive on a wreck, where it was likely that their dive guides would be unable to keep an effective eye out for the size group they had on board? I know they paid a fine, but seriously. I've dived at least 12 liveaboards in some pretty far flung places and NEVER has there not been a check out dive in calm, clear waters to establish fitness to dive. Anyone?

-Barb

 

[Divedoggie]

I'm sorry if this has been covered ad nauseum in earlier threads, and feel free to refer me back there (hard to search). Regardless of guilt or innocence, training or experience, what the heck was this (well established) boat doing not conducting a careful checkout dive before dumping these people onto a wreck in 100' of water? And even if they did, why was the very first dive on a wreck, where it was likely that their dive guides would be unable to keep an effective eye out for the size group they had on board? I know they paid a fine, but seriously. I've dived at least 12 liveaboards in some pretty far flung places and NEVER has there not been a check out dive in calm, clear waters to establish fitness to dive. Anyone?

-Barb

The trial isn't about other people's liability, but I believe that you are certainly correct in your assertion. Maybe someone can answer your question. I don't know.

It seems like liability lies in a number of places, starting with Gabe, but also with Tina. People need to take responsibility for their decisions and their actions. She was very prone to panic, had a heart condition, and barely made it through an OW course. He touted his diving abilities and convinced her and everyone else that he could and would take care of her.

The dive charter was convinced to let them forgo the checkout dive. Then they were allowed to dive independently of the group after returning to the boat to deal with the supposed computer issue.
It was her first true open water dive and their agency suggests that new divers don't go beyond 60 feet, yet they were diving on a wreck lying in 100' of water.

My wife and I were recently asked to do checkout dives on a house reef before we were assigned to a group and allowed onto a dive boat. We were asked to show Cert cards, DAN Insurance, and Nitrox Cert cards and they took a look at our log books and asked a number of questions before we ever got into the water with the DM. It was far from demeaning and actually a fun process. It reinforced our confidence in the operation because we knew that they took diving and their customers so seriously.

 

[alohagal]

You guys are aware that McFadyen reads this thread every day...scrolling to the bottom shows you who is actively viewing the thread.

 

[DandyDon]

You guys are aware that McFayden reads this thread every day...scrolling to the bottom shows you who the lurkers are!

McFadyen...?

 

[diver257a]

Does anyone know what his qualifications are?

Michael's diving qualifications are listed on the following page immediately below the photos of his boat - Michael McFadyen's Scuba Diving Web Site