cdndndnddndn is not a media link to be using... the editor over there carries on like my mother
You call your mother right now and apologize.
Diver Indicted in 2003 GBR mishap
- Thread starter shakeybrainsurgeon
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
- Status
You call your mother right now and apologize.
almitywife
Vegemite Mod
You call your mother right now and apologize.
.....................................noooooooooooooooooooo
OP
shakeybrainsurgeon
Contributor
On our last trip to the Grand Canyon, a ranger told us that the trails have been used for "marital mishaps", including the case of a woman who was thought to have committed suicide...until the medical examiner found some of her husband's hair tangled on one of her hands. Of course, this may be folklore, but it does illustrate the risk of doing potentially hazardous sports with someone who, secretly, may not be your friend.
I have dived the Yongala, and one dive there is a tie for the strongest current I've encountered in
1771 dives and another is a close third. But that picture doesn't look like a strong current, the diver
in the foreground would have been blown away with that upright trim.
And the Yongala is deepish -- the sand bottom is at about 100'. If there was a ripping current,
and the incident occured at 40', the victim's body would have settled well down-current from
the divers. Something does not compute, and it looks to me that there wasn't much current.
It would be interesting to hear the details of the insurance policy: when it was purchased, how
much it cost, what it covered.
1771 dives and another is a close third. But that picture doesn't look like a strong current, the diver
in the foreground would have been blown away with that upright trim.
And the Yongala is deepish -- the sand bottom is at about 100'. If there was a ripping current,
and the incident occured at 40', the victim's body would have settled well down-current from
the divers. Something does not compute, and it looks to me that there wasn't much current.
It would be interesting to hear the details of the insurance policy: when it was purchased, how
much it cost, what it covered.
RikRaeder
Contributor
I see what you mean about the columnist's choice of words, but very easy to take a picture of what's behind you. See POWERPUFF in my gallery for a nice back between the legs shot (then flipped 180).
As to the death of the diver in question, how can one judge with almost no information? It's a matter for the courts, I suppose.
Sueing for "mental anguish" sickens me anyway - any lawsuit like that for anything should be thrown out and not just for diving.
Anyone trying to sue someone for what is an accident is sick and deserves nothing.
(Although thats assuming it was an accident).
Anyone trying to sue someone for what is an accident is sick and deserves nothing.
(Although thats assuming it was an accident).
Wildcard, out of curiosity, what's up with your Avatar and the Arabic? Kaafar - meaning unbeliever. If you change the last letter to a و (current last letter is a ر
Salaam
C
I spent a great deal of time with some realy good people trying to teach me arabic, I failed bad. They laughed, "it;s the easyist language to learn" they tell me...To read it? yea, aint gonna happen. Just trusting what was printed just like I do the words on the back of the truck that say "stay back 100 meters or you will be shot"....Everyone gets it.
Hope to heal up soon so I can go back.
scuba_katt
Contributor
I'm a Rescue Diver living in Townsville, Queensland. I've dived the Yongala a number of times...
The word around town is that Mr Watson was seen by a witness from a different boat (Jazz III) holding Mrs Watson in a bear hug with her face close to his chest for several minutes. It has been asserted that Mr Watson had turned off Mrs Watson's air and held her close to prevent her from spitting her reg out. It is alleged Mr Watson had not realised there were divers from another boat on the wreck, and he did not realise they could see him (vis was only about 12 metres).
The DM that rescued Mrs Watson said that her mask and regulator were still in place, and if she had simply passed out, she would still be breathing. An autopsy revealed no obstruction in her airways and only very little water was found on her lungs.
In the Townsville Bulletin today, an article reporting on the inquest has stated that there have been a number of inconsistencies with regard to Mr Watson's claim he could not go down to rescue his wife because he was having severe barotrauma. However, two separate medical assessments by a Townsivlle Doctor and a New Zealand doctor suggests his ear trauma was no more than mild. Also he has changed his story several times about Mrs Watson knocking his mask off and regulator out of his mouth as she was "swept away".
I must say I am hesitant to give this man the assumption of innocence until proven guilty.... I know if my husband were to suffer any trouble under water, I would certainly put myself in severe danger before I would just let him sink away from me.
The word around town is that Mr Watson was seen by a witness from a different boat (Jazz III) holding Mrs Watson in a bear hug with her face close to his chest for several minutes. It has been asserted that Mr Watson had turned off Mrs Watson's air and held her close to prevent her from spitting her reg out. It is alleged Mr Watson had not realised there were divers from another boat on the wreck, and he did not realise they could see him (vis was only about 12 metres).
The DM that rescued Mrs Watson said that her mask and regulator were still in place, and if she had simply passed out, she would still be breathing. An autopsy revealed no obstruction in her airways and only very little water was found on her lungs.
In the Townsville Bulletin today, an article reporting on the inquest has stated that there have been a number of inconsistencies with regard to Mr Watson's claim he could not go down to rescue his wife because he was having severe barotrauma. However, two separate medical assessments by a Townsivlle Doctor and a New Zealand doctor suggests his ear trauma was no more than mild. Also he has changed his story several times about Mrs Watson knocking his mask off and regulator out of his mouth as she was "swept away".
I must say I am hesitant to give this man the assumption of innocence until proven guilty.... I know if my husband were to suffer any trouble under water, I would certainly put myself in severe danger before I would just let him sink away from me.
- Status
Similar threads
