Watson Murder Case - Discussion

[ItsBruce]

Clownfishsidney:

I do not personally know you, so I cannot assess your credibility relative to your report. However, for now, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and give you my undying gratitude for your efforts at reviewing the evidence, summarizing it so nicely for us, and clearing some misconceptions.

Should we ever cross paths, drinks are on me!!!

I would provide further commentary, but I'm getting ready to leave for the dive boat...

 

[ItsBruce]

Let me clarify a challenge, I previously made:

I asked for actual evidence Watson turned Tina's air off and then back on. How about actual evidence Tina was killed rather than just died. Note, leaving someone in distress to die does not qualify as killing them.

 

[DandyDon]

 

[bowlofpetunias]

Bruce FWIW I will certainly attest to Clownfishsydney's credibility. He is a very experienced and respected member of the dive community in OZ, a speaker at many events and has earned a very good reputation over many years

 

[tracydr]

It's never easy to get out of an abusive relationship. Some women are never able to leave. For some, staying in the abusive relationship feels safer than
Leaving. More domestic homicides occur during the time shortly after a separation
than any other time. He may have threatened to kill her if she left. Its very hard to say why she chose to stay but I doubt it was just a poor, immature decision.

Yes, they seemed to have had an abnormal view of normal.

Throwing pizza, dangling the engagement ring box, and a public argument are not indicators of premeditated murder. As a little more info continues to trickle out, we can paint a picture of immature a$$es. Plural, because it takes two to have a public argument and it illustrates that Tina should have walked away..run away, but no, she married him anyway.

Based on all the discussions and the newest information, take a leap in logic: Tina never understood the consequences of bad decisions. In both cases she chose a completely unreliable person to be her buddy in life and her buddy underwater.
Tina had multiple indicators to NOT get married..yet fooling around with the rest of her life..she got married anyway.
Tina had multiple indicators to NOT go diving..yet she fooled around with the rest of her life and went diving anyway.

For every argument that is raised concerning murder, there is reasonable doubt. Months of folly, poor decisions, incompetence, and immaturity culminated in the events that we've discussed concerning Tina's tragic death. A murder plot hatched before the wedding, before the honeymoon, just doesn't stand on it's own.

 

[Divedoggie]

It's never easy to get out of an abusive relationship. Some women are never able to leave. For some, staying in the abusive relationship feels safer than
Leaving. More domestic homicides occur during the time shortly after a separation
than any other time. He may have threatened to kill her if she left. Its very hard to say why she chose to stay but I doubt it was just a poor, immature decision.

While I agree with your professional statement concerning abusive relationships, I don't believe that we know for sure whether this specific relationship was abusive. Pizza fights and public arguments could be indicators of obnoxious immaturity. Dangling the ring box could be a a childish prank..."I got an ice cream, you can't have one..mmm it's soooo gooood." Perhaps Gabe's current wife can use this trial to expose abusive behavior, If she is in an abusive relationship. That would be telling.

Since most homicides occur right after separation, what are the statisics of homicide directly after a wedding whilst on the honeymoon?

If gabe was abusive, I hope that he gets what he deserves. However, my opinion based on observed and reported dive skills, is that 2 inexperienced and inadequately trained divers let their egos control their logic(immaturity), got into a tough situation, panicked, and failed miserably.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

Well said Divedoggie. IMHO there is just not enough "evidence" to determine if the relationship was an "Abusive Relationship" of the level to explain a deliberate homicide! Certainly seem to be issues but exposed to the cruel light of public examinations I suspect many relationships would not "look" very healthy!

 

[knowone]

Are you illiterate, a French speaker, or just mental?

 

[sipadiver]

I'm not sure whether this site has been referenced before: but it may serve as a useful reference point

http://watson-case.livejournal.com/

 

[AN]

I am a novice diver with some questions about deaths during diving in general. Other than the Swain and Watson trials, I have not seen anything, ever, about homicides committed during diving. No investigations. Nothing in scuba literature. Nothing in diving medicine literature. In an environment perfectly suited for committing a homicide and leaving no trace of evidence, why is it that this does not occur more often. Is it possible that it does occur more often? If so, is it that the dive community refuses to believe it could happen or that unless there is an eyewitness, no one will believe it happened?

My problem is this. Most homicides do not occur with an eyewitness. However, most homicides occur on dry land where it is possible to collect "evidence" (DNA, fingerprints, etc.) But even with this evidence, many convictions are made based on circumstantial evidence (which is given the same weight in court as an eyewitness account). You have to look at motive, means, and the defendant's actions before, during and after the crime. If Watson is guilty, and is acquitted, is the perfect loophole created for a murder committed while diving. From Edmonds statements, there will always be built in reasonable doubt because of the environment, someone's experience level, random acts of God, etc. It is also revealing that Edmonds can list off half a dozen reasons for her death without evidence of any of them, yet can completely rule out homicide. Just my thoughts.