Diver Indicted in 2003 GBR mishap

[ItsBruce]

Madprops: You think well. Thanks for taking the time to develop your hypothesis

The problem with your hypothesis is that certain parts are based on elements which are contrary to the "established" facts and other parts are pure speculation. Most notably, while turning a diver's air off would eventually lead to death, other than that Tina died, there is, as yet, no actual evidence her air was ever turned off. And, there are other explanations to account for death without Tina's air having been turned off. Furthermore, had Tina's death occurred as you hypothesized, there are certain things that would likely have been found, but which do not seem to have been found (or at least publicly reported). And, based on information I have seen on this thread, I am not sure your timeline is right.

You did, give me one interesting thought that I have not seen addressed: We are told that when Tina was recovered and her equipment checked, her air was "on." Was the valve all the way open or was it turned back 1/4 turn? Who turned her air on before she entered the water? Often, one of the deck hands will either turn it on or check that it is on. So, if a deck hand turned the air on or checked that it was on, was the deck hand's custom and practice to make sure the valve was all the way open or to make sure it was all the way open and then turned back 1/4 turn? (This might give us some insight as to whether the valve had been messed with in the water.)

Another thought: Do we know why Tina did not have her insurance changed? Do we have any truly disinterested witnesses who say that Gabe asked her to change it?

 

[TekISBest]

Froggs, here is the discussion of Tina's and Gabe's weighting from page 50 of this thread (I just looked at my posts to find the ones on weighting). I think there is no question that Tina was extremely overweighted no matter what exposure protection or gear she was wearing with 38 lbs of lead. Gabe, a much bigger person, was wearing much less lead, and his computer showed a steady profile, so it is clear he was not struggling with buoyancy, and therefore correctly weighted and neutrally buoyant.

Even if she was over weighted... and 38lbs is alot of weight... makes no difference here. She surfaced once which means she can surface. She is able to put enough air in the BC to surface. It also means that she would sink like a lead balloon with out enough air in the BC. New divers will have more difficulty controlling their bouyancy. Over weighting a new diver curtainly does help with that problem. As long as she is able to produce enough lift to surface is all that really matters.

I quite often see new divers on our Tuesday nights fun dive weighted heavy much like this. When i was a new diver and during my open water certification, my instructor loaded me up with 40lbs of weight. By the time i completed 20 dives i was down to 10lbs.

What killed Tina? Weather she was at 50 feet or 10 feet.. What difference does that make? If she has a reg in her mouth and the air is on then she is breathing. If she is breathing then she is not drowning or sufficating.

Something is not right here. The facts as i have seen here just don't add up. Just imagine what we don't know. Hopefully a jury will figure it all out. This is one jury i like to be on. I could be fair and would figure it out...

 

[ItsBruce]

With a bit of luck, if and when there is a trial, more evidence will be made public.

 

[K_girl]

Madprops - Don't want to discourage participation of new divers on this board, but you have to be careful about conjuring up "stories" - even if you make the assertion that it is a story. There are too many items in your story that assumes some things has having been reported which weren't. The problem is, people tend to remember past posts with these kinds of "stories" as true and then everything gets twisted and I think terribly wrong.

Prime example - the 38 pounds on Tina that is being recently reported here - completely not true. Someone said it was reported in the Coroner's Inquest - again completely not true. I've spent a lot of time trying to keep the public record straight, examining statements and reports that are in the public record. Some of them are Gabe's statements, some are witness statements and some are newspaper articles (which are probably the least reliable as there are always some elements that are misreported). I've raised the issues in this case primarily based on Gabe's statements, witness statements, the infamous photograph and the Coroner's Inquest. The issues I've raised are food for thought as we discuss this case. Personally, yes, I think he is guilty, but as ItsBruce has pointed out on multiple occassions, that has to be proven in a court of law. Imagine yourself as a juror as you ponder this case. The discussion should be on an issue-by-issue basis and what do the facts tell you? Do they show guilt, innocence or neither - and why? There is a certain amount of hypothesis that goes on, but you have to keep it within a boundry of reasoning on the known facts to make sure it does not go against the known facts. If it is a hypothesis with no basis in fact, you have to throw it out because it is meaningless. Doing otherwise simply muddles the process and makes it more cumbersome.

To clear-up the weight issue. The only source we have for the amount of weight on Tina and Gabe is from Gabe's statement. Here is Gabe's statement:

WATSON: er I think on that dive I think I had close to thirty pounds and I bet she had two eight, she may’ve had between eighteen an twenty, something like that

When he said she had two eight.. that meant he is thinking about how many pounds she had on by counting out loud similar to this: two, eight, ten, twelve.. uh.. she had between eighteen and twenty pounds. Some people looked at the "two eight" statement and conjured that meant 28 pounds and then bloated it to 38 pounds. I checked the Coroner's report - there is absolutely no mention of what Tina was wearing in kilograms or any other measurement. I also cannot find that as reported in any newspaper article. So you can see how things get out of hand when people try to go off memory and don't check their sources. That kind of post can look factual when it isn't. http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/4298852-post1057.html

So the answer is: Gabe says she had between 18 and 20 pounds, we don't know what the Coroner says. Here is my post on the issue of weight:

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/3676597-post17.html

Madprops - please read the thread I have posted in my signature line. This gives all the sources, statements and issues on this case looking through the eyes of an average scuba diver. I would love to hear from you again because ultimately, it will be non-divers who will be jurors on this case. So your perspective in looking at these issues could be quite valuable. That is, if you can put yourself in the juror's chair and ponder the evidence as I described above.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

Nicely said Kirl. I think Malprops put in a lot of effort an means well from his post. He doesn't deserve to be flamed. You have given your feedback in such a nice non judgmental way and given him a palace to go to get accurate information... thanks for all your work at keeping this complex case in as much order as possible.

Considering you have got a bit of a rouch time occassionaly because you have stated your conslusion... you still encourage everyone to be fair and factual.

 

[IceIce]

Tiny is sinking below him and out of range by 5 feet or so. He could point his head down and kick his heart out and not hardly go anywhere. This would be due to the fact that his bouyancy is holding him at the depth he is at. This would easy explain why he could not catch her. Try this yourself.. go down 50 ft.. level off.. make yourself a little light and allow yourself to come up 3 ft.. Now try and kick down against the lift of only 3 ft... you will work your ass off trying to recover..

What if his bouyancy had him light at the time he tried to dive downward to catch her. In the panic and not realizing he is light to start with would produce the statement he gave from your quote above..

He was then leisurely takes 2.5 minutes to go up to the surface from 40/45 feet.

If he had the determination to swim down to get his wife, he would have the same determination to get to the surface to look for help, and that is not taking more than 3seconds to cover one foot.

If she knocked his mask and regulator off when she panicked, and bolted up to the surface when she panicked (during her OW), she certainly not proven to be passive-panic type. It's odd that she wouldn't try to swim up during the faithful day, unless someone prevented her from doing so, or she wasn't breathing anymore.

If he tried franctically kicking down to get his wife when she sank, why witness said he let her go on the first place? And it was never mentioned that at that point he was seen to adjust his mask or reg (to tally with one of his version that he had to let go to adjust his mask after being knocked to side by his wife).

If he turned off Tina's air, that gets right to murder. But, other than that she is dead, is there evidence of it? That is my problem. The diver who saw him "hugging" her has not publicly stated he saw Watson turn off Tina's air or turn it back on. (There were two opportunities to see something.)

If every crime is convicted only when there is a witness or evidence of the process of murdering, how many crimes had actually been 'properly' proved then? By witness saying they actually see this person cutting another head off, or photo showing someone pushing another down the cliff?

With all the hoses, bubble, movement, witnesses's angle and underwater complexity, it would be easy to miss out the turning on and off of the tank if it happened, especially when the witness were not suspicious of foul play.


Aside from what have been said,
If he's quilty, this guy should gain more experiences, diving and technical knowledges before trying to pull this kind of murder.

What is the final outcome of this?

 

[madprops]

sorry if i upset any one with my post i didn't mean to.

like i said i read the thread in a short time. I just thought I could do some outside of the box thinking as I am not a diver yet

As said b4 i thought I was going to miss something and I did just that. I was just going off of this thread alone and none of the links. So some of the things i took as fact were anything but.

again i'm sorry for upseting any one

 

[ScubaSteve]

Do not worry about it madprops. You did not upset anybody. People just took the time to point out that your theories were missing a couple elements. Now ya know . This just seems to be a topic which people have become personally tied to for some reason. Stick around, read the rest of the board too. It really is a good place and you will find it an excellent tool in getting answers as you move along towards certification.

 

[NudeDiver]

OK....it's time for the truth to come out. Gabe had nothing to do with it. I know this for a fact. However, I know this because I have secret evidence that I am unable to share with you all. But, rest assured, he is innocent.

Now - as for that big fish that was in the area - different story - but that's all I can say.

 

[shoredivr]

This just seems to be a topic which people have become personally tied to for some reason. Stick around, read the rest of the board too. It really is a good place and you will find it an excellent tool in getting answers as you move along towards certification.

Amen.