K_girl
Contributor
You appear to be stating that the outcome was not the outcome which was Watson pleaded guilty to manslaughter and did take responsibility for her death.
Watson Murder Case - Discussion
- Thread starter almitywife
- 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
You appear to be stating that the outcome was not the outcome which was Watson pleaded guilty to manslaughter and did take responsibility for her death.
diving queen
Registered
K_girl, as I've stated before, the only "personal reasons" I have behind anything I've written are that I have taken an interest in this case and seem to see it from a different perspective than most other people do. Maybe I just enjoy playing devil's advocate, I don't know. As far as me having "harsh feelings" towards Tina's family, that is not the case. Most of what I have written was quotes from the media, many of which came directly from their mouths. If it was "harsh", it's just how it was reported. And again, as far as CDNN not being reputable is concerned, I'd like to point something out to you. Many of the articles that I quoted from CDNN's website were contributions from Andy Toulson. She is a writer for the Townsville Bulletin...the same Townsville Bulletin that you have referenced SEVERAL times on your web page. So does that mean that their information is "highly questionable" as well? As a matter of fact, most of the articles they print say Powered by CDNN, which means they didnt even write them. At the beginning or end of the article, you can see who wrote it and what other media outlet they work for i.e. source Townsville Bulletin or by Marienne Thomas-Ogle who it appears writes for al.com. Im not saying they are better or worse than anyone else personally, I think most all of them are full of crap, but I keep referencing them because they seem to have the most archived information on this particular subject.
diving queen
Registered
All I was trying to say is that many people don't think Watson made the wrong decision. And I'm still not convinced that Watson thinks he made the wrong decision. I mean, do you honestly believe this guy fought for as long as he did, saying he was innocent and going to fight extradition, etc and then just gave up and returned to face trial because he finally believed he was guilty? Not likely...it seems more likely to me that he decided 7 years, or 5 years, or 18 months or whatever he finally gets, sounded better than life in prison i.e. 25 years. It's been said on here before...innocent people go to jail all the time. All I'm saying is that maybe the guy wasn't willing to roll the dice...
K_girl
Contributor
diving_queen - reality is - he did not face trial. It was also reported that manslaughter deal was discussed ahead of his return to Australia. Although the prosecution would not guarantee Watson a manslaughter deal, the report was that it was discussed in terms of - if there was a manslaughter deal, how it would be structured. And indeed - that is exactly what happened shortly after his return. I believe the only reason he pleaded to manslaughter was because there was enough evidence to cause him and his attorney concern that he could be conivicted. As to what was going on his Watson's head as to his own guilt, I would not presume to guess. Certainly, his statements to police was great cause for concern. You speak of only one moment in time, his decision to leave Tina, however there are many other aspects of the case that raised suspicion, one of which was the computer beeping with the battery in backwards causing them to abort the first dive attempt.
I also have discussed that moment in time where Watson left his wife. The point I made there was if he had his reg knocked out of his mouth and his mask knocked askew, for most divers, that would cause them to head straight for the surface in a full-blown panic. However, according to Watson, that is not what he did. He managed to get his own situation under control and avoid his own panic and doing the wrong thing. Then Tina is too heavy, then Tina is out of reach and is sinking. By Watson's account, she is only 10 feet below him and her arms outstretched reaching for him, no kicking, no attempt to try and save herself, just sinking. I've measured my distance in kicks - takes me only two kicks to go 10 feet. He says he left her because he was afraid for his own safety of going too deep and getting DCI, but he told police he's been much deeper than that before and he had a full tank of air and no nitrogen loading because it was the first dive of the trip. If he said he had panicked and gone to the surface because of his mask and reg being knocked off - I think that would have been an acceptable explanation. But instead, he described his own heroic, but lame effort to save Tina that doesn't make any sense. To top it off, he says he rushed to the surface so fast to get help for Tina, he thought he might get the bends. However, his computer says it took him 2 minutes and 30 seconds to go 45 feet. That is a snail's pace. Sorry, but not understandable in my book when you really look at the detail of Watson's statements, which I have reviewed in great depth.
I would challenge you to take a very close look at the detail in Watson's statements surrounding that moment and try and make it make sense instead of making such a general statement that you and many other divers can understand how it could happen. Measure out 45 feet and walk that distance in 2 minutes and 30 seconds, let me know just how fast and reasonable you think that is. I did it - and I don't think he was in any great rush to get help for Tina.
I am not familiar with CDNN writers, so I'll have to take your word on that one. I will take a second look at the links you provided and it may make sense to add them to my blog.
I also have discussed that moment in time where Watson left his wife. The point I made there was if he had his reg knocked out of his mouth and his mask knocked askew, for most divers, that would cause them to head straight for the surface in a full-blown panic. However, according to Watson, that is not what he did. He managed to get his own situation under control and avoid his own panic and doing the wrong thing. Then Tina is too heavy, then Tina is out of reach and is sinking. By Watson's account, she is only 10 feet below him and her arms outstretched reaching for him, no kicking, no attempt to try and save herself, just sinking. I've measured my distance in kicks - takes me only two kicks to go 10 feet. He says he left her because he was afraid for his own safety of going too deep and getting DCI, but he told police he's been much deeper than that before and he had a full tank of air and no nitrogen loading because it was the first dive of the trip. If he said he had panicked and gone to the surface because of his mask and reg being knocked off - I think that would have been an acceptable explanation. But instead, he described his own heroic, but lame effort to save Tina that doesn't make any sense. To top it off, he says he rushed to the surface so fast to get help for Tina, he thought he might get the bends. However, his computer says it took him 2 minutes and 30 seconds to go 45 feet. That is a snail's pace. Sorry, but not understandable in my book when you really look at the detail of Watson's statements, which I have reviewed in great depth.
I would challenge you to take a very close look at the detail in Watson's statements surrounding that moment and try and make it make sense instead of making such a general statement that you and many other divers can understand how it could happen. Measure out 45 feet and walk that distance in 2 minutes and 30 seconds, let me know just how fast and reasonable you think that is. I did it - and I don't think he was in any great rush to get help for Tina.
I am not familiar with CDNN writers, so I'll have to take your word on that one. I will take a second look at the links you provided and it may make sense to add them to my blog.
Last edited:
Devil's advocate? Hardly. Feels more like a bad take on a Monty Pythin skit to me.
Many of the comments you made or quoted sound like they came from people who weren't actually aquainted with the story. Put forth any fact you like and let's discuss it. Your shotgun approach makes it hard to address anything and move toward consensus.
How about this. You have a scenario with visibility where you haven't lost sight of your buddy, she has fallen a few meters below you, and she is in distress and sinking. You are at the start of your dive with a full tank and no issues of your own. Is it the right thing to let her sink, lose sight of her, and swim for help, or to vent some air and get down to her? Remember, you're rescue certified.
If, for some insane reason, you decide that leaving your buddy to go for help makes more sense, where exactly do you plan to send the help? Now that you've lost contact in current and she probably won't be anywhere near where you last saw her, where do you look? If Watson were also a new diver, was in some distress himself, saw her dropping into a depth he couldn't handle, or lost sight of Tina, then searching out assistance was probably the right thing.
If Tina was having breathing difficulties, it would most likely have been related to panic or hyperventilation. She had a full tank of air and her regulator never left her mouth. Give me any other reason why she might have been unable to breath without having her tank valve closed for a minute or two that also would not have shown up in a post mortem investigation. A panicking diver could definitely be dangerous up to the point where she lost consciousness. A hyperventilating person is typically just about incapacitated and should be easy to control from the start.
All this discussion assumes that Watson actually wanted to save Tina, who was having some problem that he did not cause. If one wants to believe that to be true, then all of the actions and facts have to support that. While it is possible, I don't believe it to be true. Among the tipping points for me is the dive computer battery story.
Among the pieces of information I have been hoping to hear from the start of this is just how capable a diver Watson was. We know he was rescue certified, but not if he had any more advanced certs or what his diving history was. At least, I don't recall that ever coming out. If it turns out that he had the minimum dive count required for his certifications and wasn't really capable, I would be more likely to believe he was incompetent rather than a murderer.
Also, with the facts in play, I can't see how anyone could say that Tina died "as a result of a diving accident for which she was solely responsible." This woman was apparently heavily pressured into diving at all by her fiance/husband and then taken, by him, on an inappropriate dive for a beginning diver. In a vacuum, we would all put blame on her for even getting into the water, but it would be quite hard to name her as "solely responsible" under any circumstance. A statement like that is purely inflammatory and has nothing to do with the concept of "devil's advocate". If I were to name her as solely responsible, it would be for trusting her safety to a man who either wasn't as competent as he claimed, or who actually intended her harm, not for her actions in the water.
Also, as far as your question about why he would go back to Australia if he were guilty, there are a couple answers to that. One is that there was some discussion ahead of time that he would be allowed to plea the case out and get off with a short sentence. For a man who was actually guilty, taking a year to erase any possibility of a future finding against him seems a good deal. It effectively brings an end to any investigation. Second, with extradition proceedings continuing, it could have reached the point where his return to Australia was inevitable. At that point, a cooperative defendant stands a better chance than one dragged back kicking and screaming. This is proven out in the judge's comments on the case.
diving queen
Registered
Well, I'm going to respond to this and then I think I'm done for a while. You guys are getting decidedly more worked up over this whole thing than I am. Am I sad that a young lady died...absolutely! Do I believe that the outcome of this is going to affect my life one way or the other not so much! I feel like Im being attacked because I choose to view this case in a little different light than the rest of you. Being called inflammatory and told that I have a shotgun approach to discussing this is kind of insulting, as Im certain it was meant to be. I was simply looking for a little light sparring over the matter a friendly discussion with varying opinions, but it appears that K_girl and bsee65 allow for only one opinion on the matter and that is theirs.
I would like to clear one thing up though. The following comment from the scuba forum that I included earlier - Gabe had more experience, and he did the 'right thing' (textbook answer) on how he responded, and what he did that day. Overconfidence is what kills scuba divers. Becoming separated from a "dive buddy" is a violation of safety procedures for recreational diving. I'm afraid Tina died "as a result of a diving accident for which she was solely responsible. I know that may not sit well with the family, but such is life. No one put a gun to her head to do it. - WAS NOT my comment. I found in on another forum and only included it as proof that there are others that dont feel that Gabe Watson made the wrong decision that day. I DO NOT agree that Tina was responsible for her own death and in hindsight should have included only the bolded sentences of that comment as they were the only portion relevant to my argument. I was not trying to insight anyone and I apologize if I did so. Sorry to have stirred up the hive; I hope you guys enjoy agreeing with each other until you finally get sick of talking about it.
K_girl
Contributor
And Tina, who is simply reaching up, just 10 short feet away, apparently hoping Watson will grab her hand, sinking and not kicking - as Watson described, seems to be a diver who is pretty willing to be rescued and doesn't appear to be struggling at the moment Watson decided to leave her. The reasons he gave for leaving? Include: 1) she was sinking quickly and he was afraid of the bends because of depth; 2) ear problems; and 3) wouldn't know how to retrieve her off the bottom other than taking off her equipment because he was never trained to do so. That's a lot of different levels of thinking for a split-second decision. So, I would have to say that Watson is capable of thinking through a tough situation, look at all the things he said he was thinking about.
It would have been better for him to say something like this: 1) I was not thinking, I was just reacting and I wanted to get help; 2) I know I'm a trained rescue diver, but I just forgot all my training and completely freaked out.
How does he handle the question of the slow 2-minute and 30-second ascent? He did say: I was swimming around looking for help and actually shook one Asian diver to get his attention. But this creates conflicts with this statement he made: I rushed to the surface so fast I'm surprised I didn't get the bends. The second problem: all divers on the three boats in the area that day were located and interviewed, not one of them said that any diver came up to them and shook them.
Last edited:
K_girl
Contributor
But including it in the manner you did certainly made it appear that you endorsed the comment as you seemed to be endorsing many other comments in that post as well.
However, many of us who have been here for a while have not always agreed on everything, believe me. There was another thread before this one that was active for a couple of years and it got very emotional and was shut down because of it. But I think some of us, including myself, became a little too personally invested in the discussion. And among those of us who did get too personally invested and are still here, we finally let go from trying to convice everyone that we are "right" about everything and have started looking for common ground. But still, we don't always agree, but certainly, it has become more civil. If you do a poor job of trying to make your point, your faulty reasoning will not be overlooked. I have found myself on the receiving end of that more than once. However, I still think the majority of discussions have remained very lively and incredibly insightful and valuable. There are people who really pissed me off to no end at one time that I have since thanked for their insight. There are several of us who have said "goodbye" on this thread at one time or another, but like you, this case intrigues us. It is, afterall one of the few scuba-related deaths that we have so much information on, albeit imperfect.
For instance, examine the significance of several reports that Tina still had the regulator in her mouth when she was found. As Watson also seemed to describe her reaching up for him as she sank would indicate that as well. There are so many small details to examine when looking at this case and if you really have the intense interest in this case that you say you have, you should look at everything and try to put the puzzle together. You will find yourself looking at this for countless hours, perhaps over a period of more than a year. Trust me. Hint: You can really put the biggest part of the puzzle together based on Watson's statements alone. If your point is to say you can understand Watson's actions, then you need to put that into context of what he said happened and make them fit together to make sense. If you do that - then I think we can have the kind of discussion you mentioned. Otherwise, if it is based on a bunch of opinions of people who have not taken the time I have to examine the details of his statements, then I am not going to be easily persuaded.
As for discussion as to whether or not Watson is guilty of murder, to me it's moot because there will be no trial with no trier of fact, no evidence presented and I'm doubtful that there will be one here in the U.S. The discussion has now turned to the more timely subject of the manslaughter plea, conviction and sentencing.
Last edited:
alohagal
Contributor
I am enjoying each and every post here the last two days. I am off to work the night shift now in the ER and look forward to more of this lively discussion when I get back in the morning. I have had no time to really peruse each post as thoroughly as I would like. But, it will get my undivided attention this weekend. And I am going to go back and reveiw eachof those CDNN articles. So thanks again for the links.
Keep up the good work all of you. Each poster has something refreshing to add and I hope they stay. Livinoz...get back in here! You are missed.
Respectfully,
Mary
Keep up the good work all of you. Each poster has something refreshing to add and I hope they stay. Livinoz...get back in here! You are missed.
Respectfully,
Mary
livinoz
Contributor
- Messages
- 4,129
- Reaction score
- 0
The quotes you allude to in Diving Queen's post were from various media sources and have been used many times by people in two threads to argue for and against this case. However I think the debate as to whether the media is the correct place to be gathering "evidence" is long over.
Please, let's not resort to personal attacks though and ruin a reasonably good debate; that's unnecessary and does you no credit as some of your arguments have been thought-provoking.
Mary I haven't really anything to add, so I've stayed out of here, but thanks. When we have access to the results of the Appeal I may have more to say; then again, maybe not!
Similar threads
