Diver Indicted in 2003 GBR mishap

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good analysis, doctor.

In this instance, I would say that if the prosecution could prove an act, it will have proved intent. If nothing else, Gabe's failure to immediately explain the incident with something like: "We were practicing an OOA scenario and it went bad," or "We were horsing around and it went bad," makes it hard for him to disclaim intent if the act is proved.

I just have a problem with proof of the act. How can one prove Gabe turned off the air? If he turned on the air while on the boat or he checked that the air was on while on the boat, his fingerprints would be on the valve knob. So fingerprints mean nothing.

As to the so-called "bear hug," that could just have been a failed attempt to keep Tina from sinking. I know that our training says inflate the BCD and/or dump weights. It is surprising how quickly one forgets one's training when things go wrong.

As a real life example of forgetting one's training, I relate the following: My neighbor dropped his cigar into his trash can one afternoon (or at least I'm pretty sure that's what happened). In any event, it finally burst into flame somewhere in the middle of the night ... right next to my house. I discovered this when some people who just happened to be passing by started pounding on my door to tell me the trash can was on fire. I grabbed a fire extinguisher from my kitchen cabinet and had at the fire. The fire was still going even though the extinguisher was empty. I grabbed the extinguisher from the car and emptied it, too. On my way to grab my last extinguisher from the garage, I grabbed a phone and called the fire department. They arrived as was well into my last extinguisher. The firemen calmly walked over to me, turned on the garden hose I was standing next to and ensured the fire was out. The bottom line was that I completely overlooked a perfectly good water hose.

By way of another example, the local lifeguards put on a safety program at our dive club. (Our club is long on DMs and instructors.) All of a sudden, one of them fell over. Everyone jumped into action with an emergency plan. The only thing everyone forgot was to grab a cell phone and call 911....which was the point of the exercise. We all learned a lot.

That Gabe may have forgotten his training would be no surprise. That he might try to hold Tina and swim her to the surface is no big surprise. I am, however, surprised he did not then IMMEDIATELY surface, but I still have concerns about guilt or innocence.
 
Let's move away from motive for a moment. Let me ask a question about the manner of Tina's death. I am completely or at least nearly completely ignorant as to the mechanism of her death. Do the police have a theory about how Gabe killed her? I assume there is something more than his failure to do something to save her. By way of illustration, I'm guessing that there is no evidence of a knife wound or blunt force trauma. Is there evidence of a struggle or sabotaged equipment? Is there evidence Gabe have turned off Tina's air and let her asphyxiate? Is there evidence Gabe caused Tina to ascend rapidly enough to embolize? Is there evidence Gabe pulled the regulator from Tina's mouth?

Thanks

BTW: My name is Bruce. My username is ItsBruce.
Bruce,
Look for a sticky that proclaims DO NOT RESPOND about this incident something like that. This is the discussion thread and K girl has put some incredible amount of work keeping a running record of links separate from the discussion. There is the corner's report eventually. I'd expect the news etc have wound down so the report may be in the later pages.
Sorry it is waaaaay to long for those of us who are hanging around (except K girl J) to keep all the bits and pieces in order, let alone recall all the details, and even more unrealistic, find them in there.
A key component however is Gabe, supposedly an experienced and Rescue trained diver is claiming all sorts of idiotic actions, thoughts and events such computer proving not happen. Note: if you look back you certainly will run across the inflammatory photo of 2 people in the foreground taking a photo and Tina falling like a inanimate doll in the background that is not Gabe there, other people who did not notice Tina falling sinking whatever, nor Gabe anywhere around as I recall.
Personally I would love it if you would read and listen to the Gabe interviews. And digest them with your jurisprudence eye and let us know what that eye makes of them.
Aloha.

HEY! At least in preview - I'm not getting all that 'odd characters' gibberish! If so, ya hoo!.
 
Hi guys. Have you missed me? I'm in Cozumel, doing what else? Been here since Sunday. Taking a morning break today and catching up.

This case will be mostly a circumstantial case. There have been convictions on these types of cases. If you had to have physical evidence to prove every aspect of a case, it would be impossible to convinct anyone of anything. For instance, no one saw Scott Peterson dump his wife into the Bay, but they were ready to go to trial even without the body. In this case, however, there are several pieces of physical evidence that will be important to the case:

1) the dive computer says he lied about two very important things: a) that his computer was beeping with the battery in backwards on the first aborted dive; and b) his claim that he had a very fast ascent, so fast that he was surprised he didn't get DCI. His computer showed he ascended from 40 feet in 2 minutes and 45 seconds. The instructor who retrieved Tina went to 90 feet and brought her up in 1 minute and 30 seconds.

2) The picture of Tina on the bottom is physical evidence. It does many things to refute several of Watsons claims: a) visibility was more than 30 feet which Gabe purposefully changed from 90 feet to 30 feet to explain why they were fighting the current because they were trying to get back to the rope which they could see. The picture clearly shows significantly more visiblity; b) Gabe initially proclaimed that he "lost" Tina because of low visibility, the picture shows that Tina is clearly visible; c) Gabe claimed that the current carried Tina away, yet Tina is clearly visible in the picture; d) The picture shows Tina on her back on the bottom with the reg still in her mouth and another piece of physical evidence, her tank was full of air. The eye witness who saw the bear hug saw her sink with the reg in her mouth as well, so the picture corroborates what he said. This witness also saw her vomiting while she was being carried to the surface. The Coroner's Findings concluded that she aspirated the water into her lungs during this time and these circumstances in combination were the reason they concluded that the only way this could have happened was her air had been turned off.

3) eye witness testimony of "bear-hug" although not physcial evidence, will be important. The eye witness account matches the picture of Tina's positioning, etc., so his testimony would be considered accruate. Watson never proclaimed in his interview with police that he had his arms around Tina nor his position on top of her as the eye witness stated. The eye witness said the male diver let go of Tina and let her sink. If you read the interviews, you will find the detectives were attempting to get him to talk about every movement, which Gabe did comply. Gabe described how he at one point had a hold of her BC with one hand, pulling her along. Then he describes how Tina started panicking and knocked his mask off, so he got away from her. Then she started sinking. These are two very starkly different stories. So it will be up to the jury to decide who is telling the truth. The person who has no reason to lie, or the person who has already been caught in numerous lies.

K_girl

P.S. Going to Akumal, Mx on Sunday to dive cenotes for a few days!
 
This may help you find a post:

Go to the accidents and incidents forum list page

Find this thread and look for the column that says replies

Right now it says 943 that number is in blue and is underlined - that means it is a link

If you click on that link, a window will open with a list of all who have posted in this thread and the number of their posts. The person with the greatest number of posted first and then in descending order.

You can click on each individual and their posts will be displayed.

Hope this helps you in your quest.
 
Off topic but thanks for that info Grover48....I never knew about that function of post count summary by thread.
 
ShakyBrainSurgeon,

Thanks for your medical analysis. But one thing you said struck me:

"Moreover, the heart (especially a young one) can survive for a long time after total lack of ventilation based on the reservoir of oxygen dissolved in the blood."

I presume you are assuming that Tina was a young woman with a normal heart. But her heart wasn't "normal": she had an arrythmia. Although the coroner (post-autopsy) concluded that the arrythmia didn' cause her death, it was drowning, I have always been curious about whether shutting off her air even for a short time wouldn't have caused her heart to race even faster and then contributed to her death. As you well know, there are always times where a multitude of factors contribute to a death.

I am probably more sensitive than most to this because I have a tachycardia problem which I watch very closely when diving. And yes, there have been moments where I started the dive in calm water and then the current kicked up later on and I found myself swimming like mad (as Tina did in the strong current) and I noticed my heart was racing (despite the meds I'd taken that morning). I'm pretty sure that if somebody had come along and cut off my air at that point, even for just a few seconds, my heart would have started racing even faster and I would have been in REAL difficulty.

So I'm curious if, now knowing that Tina had an arrythmia, your medical analysis of this would change.

Thanks!
Tricia
 
Maybe we could prevail upon Kgirl to Put the link to her thread in her signature so we can just click on that to find the thread?

K_girl is a legend for all her work on this
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom