Tina Watson Death - The Full Story

[clownfishsydney]

ScubaSteve, I have all the evidence that was held by the prosecution as well as some evidence gathered by the defence. I would love to make it available, but it is something like 600 Gb all up. I am sure that it is impossible for me to share this. I have attempted to put bits like the computer printouts up and some other things. If someone thinks that a certain bit of evidence would make the site better, then email me and I will see what I can do.

As to how Tina drowned with her reg in her mouth, Dr Carl Edmonds would have given evidence to state that this is possible. Remember, he was head of the Royal Australian Navy's dive medical section and has also written all the acknowledged dive medical text books. Have you not had water seep in through a loose fitting mouth piece? A bit of water get in if you are upsidedown? Accidently take in a bit of water if you move your mouth a bit? I have to all of these. When Tina fell unconscious, she was still breathing but her grip on her reg relaxed and she sucked in a little bit of water and it went into her lungs. This may have even been happening when she was overbreathing her regulator. We know she got water in her lungs as the autopsy showed this and the resusitators witnessed water and froth come out of her mouth. You only need a very small amount to drown, less than a few ounces will do it.

The case would have been on the basis that:

* Gabe was inexeprienced and should not have been permitted to dive the wreck unsupervised (as per the operator's rules)
* Tina should not have been able to dive except with an instructor/dive master (again as per rules)
* he did not lie about the computer beeping
* Police investigation was inept - much evidence to show this
* evidence confirming that Gabe had told 2 people within seconds he ascended after the first attempt that his computer was faulty and exactly what the problem was
* that this evidence was not presented by police as it supported Gabe's story
* air used by both Tina and Gabe showed they were panicking
* his ascent was quick considering that he attempted to attract a person's attention on the way up
* that the police never actually asked any questions of the divers on the line if someone had bumped into them or shook them (the police questions if answered would not elicit an answer to this matter)
* he was swimming into a moderate to strong current
* Tina was grossly overweighted
* Tina's BCD was incapable of lifting her with the weight she had
* if the re-enactments had been allowed, that none of them had similar conditions to the day in questions
* what they re-enacted did not represent at all what Gabe had said had happened
* the point identified by Wade Singleton where he picked up Tina was totally wrong and appearing to make it seemed Gabe lied about where they were when she sank
* the operator breached about 6 Queensland laws in permitting Gabe and Tina to dive together
* medical evidence that drowning was the only cause of death - Dr Edmonds had access to CAT scans etc
* other non-diving evidence to show that other actions were not suspicious (eg his visit to Tina's work to ask about insurance was at the direction of his lawyer as Gabe was the administrator of Tina's estate)
* Gabe inherited a debt of over $24,000 plus the whole of the mortgage on their new house ($180,000) when Tina only had about $4,000 in assets
* Gabe was never the beneficiary of any insurance
* Tina had never even written a will to give Gabe her assets
* and more of which I am not privileged to know

Finally, I know I said I would not answer any more questions to Roger, but no, I am not writing a book on this matter nor will I ever make any money out of this. It has cost me and my wife $10,000 in lost wages, airfares, accommmodation, food and more to do what we did. We did it because it was the right thing to do. Simple. Truth. Fact.

 

[clownfishsydney]

Divedoggie, the last point you made is quite relevant. This was asked of Wade Singleton, the trip director for the operator. He agreed that Tina could not have saved Gabe. You are right in that in that case, no one would ever have questioned whether this was an accident and the thought of murder would never have come up. The simple fact is that despite what has been stated elsewhere, Gabe was a totally inexperinced diver, most of whose dives were in a freshwater quarry and many of which were for less than 10 minutes or less than 20 feet. Having a large number of dives (not that he had that) does not equal experience.

 

[ScubaSteve]

ScubaSteve, I have all the evidence that was held by the prosecution as well as some evidence gathered by the defence. I would love to make it available, but it is something like 600 Gb all up.

No need. Hearing Roger say you were saying things that pretty much meant you had to have seen evidence was good enough. Before I invested that much time I just wanted something that supported what you were saying. All is good IMO. Thanks for the info.

 

[Divedoggie]

The simple fact is that despite what has been stated elsewhere, Gabe was a totally inexperinced diver, most of whose dives were in a freshwater quarry and many of which were for less than 10 minutes or less than 20 feet. Having a large number of dives (not that he had that) does not equal experience.

Clownfishsydney, I went back and read about your Blue Springs dive. Sounds like a pretty nice and relaxing dive! Maybe I missed it, but is there an available list of Gabe's logged dives? Less than 10 minutes and less than 20 feet probably shouldn't have been logged. If there were a lot of those type of "dives", it would make the published reports of Gabe's 55 dives even more misleading.

 

[clownfishsydney]

Divedoggie, check the first page of the series of articles Michael McFadyen's Scuba Diving Web Site. Not all dives are there as I have not put up the ones before his Cozumel trip. I have also attempted to summarise the depth and time of the dives as well as training dives. According to his paper log book, he only did 27 real dives (my definition is not shallow, short or training dives) and only 13 without supervision.

 

[Doubler]

Mike,
Thanks for all the information. Pretty much surmises what I have been telling people since it all happened. You left one thing off your list- Tina's family complete disliking of Gabe prior to the wedding. This whole case was driven by a sense of a family getting revenge on a son in law they did not like and then he started acting like an ass towards them in return. Why aren't charges being brought against Spoilsport? I have seen where they paid a fine but no jail time, why? Gabe did 18 months for being a bad dive buddy I would think someone on that crew was just as or more responsible than Gabe and some diffinent poor dive mastering went on per your citing of 6 broken laws.

 

[clownfishsydney]

No comment on why such a paltry fine, I am still amazed.

Yes, did not cover the dislike since Roger was having a go at me for putting information about this in my web site in an attempt to explain what happened later. Yes, it had an enormous impact, and without the lobbying that went on by the Thomas's and US Senators and Congressmen, this would have remained a simple accident.

 

[Kreed]

Michael McFayden needs to actually get his information from public records versus media sources. I you had indeed read the transcript from the police interview in Australia you would know that there were 16 different discrepancies in Gabe's statement. And even now Gabe is telling a different version of what happened. There were dive experts at trial that testified to what happened. Dr. Edmonds who did come to court was not there at that time, so I am assuming that the information he gave was from media sources. Media does not always report accurately, as I would hope that you knew. The claims that he was found not guilty in 2 places is false. Australia made a plea agreement with Gabe while he was in the US. The plea deal did not say he was not guilty, it was ruled manslaughter and I think the definition of manslaughter is to cause someone's death. A grand jury in the US found him guilty of 2 counts of Capital Murder. If you were in court the entire time, you would also know that the judge would not let the prosecution present its entire case. Also, you (Michael McFayden) and Carl Edmons were both paid witnesses for the defense. Also, before the trial even started, there was a book deal which would make money for both of them if Gabe was acquitted. If you are going to state information as facts, it would be wise to actually use court transcripts, public records etc., to get information correct. I really could go on and on with facts, but there are so many that have not been spoken of in this forum.

 

[Divedoggie]

Why is it so difficult for people to wrap their heads around the fact that inexperienced divers make gross mistakes?

They press the inflator button instead of the deflator, they try to swim downward against a positively buoyant BCD instead of venting air from it, they overweight themselves, they are not familiar with their equipment, they lose buddy contact during the most critical part of he dive..the initial descent, they overestimate their abilities, they are prone to panic, and pretty much anything else that you can dream of.

For new divers, there are usually checkout dives, or at least present is a Divemaster or Instructor who helps people correct the small problems before they become big problems. Underwater, it only takes a couple of seconds for a small problem to escalate into a big one.

It is not unusual for an inexperienced diver to not clearly recall the exact events of a dive. The senses are overloaded. The feel of the water, the pressure and need to equalize air spaces, visual stimulation of color, shapes, structure, fishes, checking computer and gauges, the mechanical sound of breathing through a regulator, dealing with ropes and lines, adjusting buoyancy, dealing with a current, and keeping track of the buddy.

Now add a horrifically traumatic event to the equation along with barotrauma and start answering questions. How many discrepancies would the average person make? How many discrepancies would a prideful person make? How many discrepancies would a person who is prone to exaggeration and even fibs or lies make? A liar who gets caught telling lies, is only a liar. He is a murderer only if murder is proven.

An experienced observer of this sad and tragic story does not need to make the mental leap to murder to explain how it all happened. Similar events happen all of the time, but with different and less serious results, because someone (an expert) was there to correct the problem.

Finally, one of the skills that is taught in the pool everyday is an air deprivation exercise where the Instructor turns the student's air off underwater and the student breathes the air all of the way out of the hoses, signals, and then the Instructor turns the air back on. It takes many twists of the wrist to get the valve turned all of the way off. Then it takes quite awhile for the student to breathe all of the air out of the hoses, then it takes many twists of the wrist to turn the valve all of the way back on again.

This scenario takes about a minute under ideal conditions at the bottom of the pool. After the last breath, there are still at least 30 seconds that would be necessary before full blown panic and an effort to swim to the surface would cease and the diver would pass out.

Now imagine two divers struggling in a current and struggling with their buoyancy. Watson would have had to have had total control in the water column to turn Tina's air off, hold her down until she breathed out the hoses and quit attempting to swim to the surface, wait till she passed out, and then casually turn her air back on. Tina's equipment in place, regulator in her mouth and her placid expression indicates passive panic.
This scenario wouldn't cause passive panic. It would be full blown panic with the regulator being spit out, equipment coming off, and a desperate attempt to swim to the surface. Gabe would have had to prevent that too.
Quite a feat.

I don't personally know any of the people in this sad story. No stake in it whatsoever. As a detached observer and follower of the story, and as a dive pro who has seen people make numerous mistakes which very similarly mirror the Watson mistakes, I can't get on board with the murder scenario. IMO as a detached observer, it is a ridiculously far fetched attempt to explain that which will never be totally explained or understood.

 

[Mark Derail]

I'd just like to point this out - very brave of Michael to expose himself to the scathing criticism of ScubaBoard.com nitpicks, though his rather low post count might explain this.

Murder = (usually) premeditation - there has to be zero doubt. Michael decided that with all the information provided to him, and his experience, there was doubt.

It was his job to explain "why" to the court.

Again, Michael is very brave to come out like this. Now it doesn't mean I fully agree - I couldn't live with myself if as a buddy, if I abandoned Sylvie in similar circumstances.

Before you tear him up - would YOU come out like this?

As most divers would know, American diver Tina Watson died in 2003 when diving the SS Yongala in Queensland while on her honeymoon. In 2008 her husband, Gabe, was charged In Queensland with murder. He later pled guilty to manslaughter on the basis that he was negligent in his role as a buddy. He served 18 months in gaol.

In 2012 Gabe Watson went on trial in Birmingham, Alabama,for Tina's murder. He was acquitted by the judge when the State did not produce any evidence of murder or that it had been planned in Alabama.

As some will know, I have had an interest in this matter since 2003. At first I thought he was guilty but in 2010 I found transcripts of the second police interview with Gabe and within a few minutes I realised that he had been telling the truth the whole time about a key bit of information and that the police and media had either ignored or not understood what he. This piece was considered by the police to be the thing that proved Gabe was lying and therefore was guilty of murder.

Over the following 18 months I was given access to a lot more evidence by a number of journalists and I came to the certain view that Gabe was totally innocent of murder, and just a very inexperienced diver who also panicked and made the wrong decision.

Late in 2011 I was asked to be the defence's expert dive witness alongside Dr Carl Edmonds (probably the foremost dive medical person in the world) who was to be the defence medical witness. We were then given access to all the evidence and Carl and I spent a lot of time going through it and discussing it. We came to the same conclusions about what happened and why Tina died.

We spent the month of January 2012 preparing questions for the defence to ask all the possible State witnesses as well as questions to ask us. In February we both flew to Alabama and attended the trial.

I have now totally updated my web site pages on Tina's death, including evidence that I was previously not at liberty to divulge as well as graphs, photos and a summary of each day's evidence at the trial.

I encourage everyone to look at my pages and make up their own mind as to what happened.

The link to the index page is Michael McFadyen's Scuba Diving Web Site.

I will be happy to answer any questions on this matter, either by email via my web site or on this forum, so long as civility is maintained.