Tina Watson Death - The Full Story

[bowlofpetunias]

I'd like to thank Michael for taking the time to put up such a comprehensive article. Like most people I had long based my opinion on Gabes innocence on the information fed to us by the TV networks. Over the last couple of months however, I had changed my mind based on the other threads to to thinking that he was probably innocent. Having now read your article i'm totally convinced that he is innocent of murder, and that the Qld Police totally bothced their investigation. Your article is now a great source of information on the event that I can 'hand out' to other people.

Sadly I must say that I have gained from participating in discussions about this incident. The way people like Michael, Itsbruce, Underexposed, Kgirl, alohagal, DandyDon, Foxfiah and others have examined and discussed issues have been very enlightening. The information I have gained from Dadvocate, and particularly Divedoggie (and others whose names aren't comming immediately to mind but also deserve recognition) I believe makes me a safer diver. My humble and grateful thanks to all of you:worship:

I do believe that it is still appropriate to discuss this and people like Mark and I get to learn more. I also believe there will be a time.. and I hope it is not too far distant future when this can be relegated to a cobwebbed corner and only visited by the occasional member stumbling across it to hopefully learn as well.

 

[Griffo]

Hey Michael,

I dont recall seeing any buoyancy calculations on your site. From what I can tell, at depth, she would have been negatively buoyant even with her BCD fully inflated? Have I got something wrong? (this is in KG obviously)

	Surface Buoyancy	Depth
Regs	-1.4	-1.4
Tank	-2	-2
Wetsuit	10	2.7
Weights	-9	-9
BCD (inflated)	7.7	7.7
TOTAL	5.3	-2

Edit: I think the Sea Hornet is -2KG negative, but i'm trying to read a very blury jpeg on their website to get that figure.

 

[clownfishsydney]

OzGriffo, yes, this is probably correct, although no way to really prove without a proper re-enactment. Remember, the police re-enactment was flawed in so many ways that it was not accepted as evidence. I am not sure that she may have been this far overweighted including BCD lift, but it goes to show that she was grossly overweighted and this was very significant in what happened.

Adding link to my web site again for new comers to the thread: Michael McFadyen's Scuba Diving Web Site

 

[Ayisha]

Remember, the police re-enactment was flawed in so many ways that it was not accepted as evidence.

I don't believe re-enactments are normally accepted as evidence. It was not admissable probably because it was too prejudicial, as other re-enactments would be.

 

[clownfishsydney]

The re-enactments were disallowed as there were too many variables that could not be made the same as the day of the accident. For example, the current and the viz. Also, the judge said that even he knew that using a male who was 14 kg heavier and shorter meant that there was no way that the re-enactment would be accurate. There was also a recent appeal case where a verdict was thrown out because there were too many inaccurate variables and this greatly influenced his decision.

 

[boulderjohn]

Kreed, I think McFadyen has a couple dozen dives under his belt and Edmonds is fairly new to the diving scene. It's hard to imagine either of them have very much diving experience. It's probably all about the book.

I am unclear of the purpose of this post. It is so totally wrong that I assumed it was sarcasm, but without the smiley's I can't be sure. Since Dr. Edmonds has been one of the world's leading authorities on dive medicine and dive accidents for decades, it is very hard to understand why you would say this if you weren't joking.

 

[Ayisha]

The re-enactments were disallowed as there were too many variables that could not be made the same as the day of the accident. For example, the current and the viz. .

Except that the police stated that they did the re-enactments several times in the same current and viz conditions as when the accident occurred. Each time, when they started from where Gabe said he was when he "lost" Tina, the "body" fell near the wreck and nowhere near where the body was actually found. Their conclusion was that Gabe and Tina were not where Gabe said they were when Tina began freefalling as the body could not be swept that far off.

Long before this went to trial, ItsBruce had stated that the video re-enactment would not be admissable because it was too prejudicial and everyone who commented agreed.

 

[Ayisha]

I am unclear of the purpose of this post. It is so totally wrong that I assumed it was sarcasm, but without the smiley's I can't be sure. Since Dr. Edmonds has been one of the world's leading authorities on dive medicine and dive accidents for decades, it is very hard to understand why you would say this if you weren't joking.

Remember that ACES50 has identified himself as Gabe's father. What I didn't get was that McFadyen and Edmunds are supporting the defence of his son, so his belittling of them is even more bewildering.

 

[boulderjohn]

Remember that ACES50 has identified himself as Gabe's father. What I didn't get was that McFadyen and Edmunds are supporting the defence of his son, so his belittling of them is even more bewildering.

No, I did not remember that.

It makes the sarcasm theory seem about right. The previous posters were belittling McFadyen and Edmonds, so he may have been sarcastically responding to the others.

 

[Ayisha]

Aah, that makes sense.

What is this "nominate" button you and some others have?

Edit later: Ok, well, now everyone seems to have a nominate button. I clicked on mine but it doesn't go anywhere. I guess I can't nominate myself for whatever it is.