Watson Murder Case - Discussion

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!

With the judge ridiculing the insurance angle and blocking Tina's dad from testifying, it looks like a tail spin.

I guess we'll see Tommy Thomas on TV shows talking about justice was not allowed.
 
Judge allowed Tommy Thomas to testify...just not about the subject of hearsay about Gabe wanting to up the insurance before the honeymoon.
 
All we know about Tina's work insurance is that Gabe apparently thought he was the beneficiary as the HR person where Tina worked testified that Watson came into her work about one month after her death to inquire about filing a claim. We don't know if there were any questions asked of this witness about Watson's reaction or statements when he found out he was not the beneficiary.

The prosecution was made to look bad by one witness who claimed that no water had come out of her mouth as he performed CPR o Tina, then had to recant that statement based upon the defense's reading of his statement saying that water did come out of her mouth. It looks like the prosecution was ill-prepared for this witness.

What I think some people may miss here is the fact that the defense will have to educate the jury on some of the technical aspects of diving because there was testimony that the regulator was still in Tina's mouth when she was recovered and she had plenty of air. If she did not die of a heart attack or other disease, the jury will believe that there had to be some reason she stopped breathing and drowned, the most logical conclusion being that she was deprived of air somehow. The regulator was not knocked out of her mouth, nor did she spit it out - will be very important. The defense will have to get technical on this issue. Does overexertion, overbreathing a reg and panic cause a person to drown? I know some of you may say you came close at one time or another, but close is not dead. DAN may be able shed some light on this issue. How many divers died and drowned from panic with a reg in their mouth, air in their tank, no heart attack or other disease? Do they even track that information? Will the jury interpret the fact that she did not lose her reg as someone holding on for dear life and trying to breathe in spite of everything going on? Will they go for the simple to understand interpretation or the more technical one? We wait to see..
 
Now that the trial is over and done. Gabe Watson will still live with the specter, the rest of his life, that some people will think he did, indeed, kill his wife Tina.
 
Now that the trial is over and done. Gabe Watson will still live with the specter, the rest of his life, that some people will think he did, indeed, kill his wife Tina.

He pled guilty to manslaughter in Australia, right?
 
Last edited:
As a person heavily involved in this matter the past couple of years, and with full access to ALL the evidence, and having sat through a lot of the evidence in the court and been giving advice on diving related matters to the defence, I have a lot of comments to make about this case. When I get time I will log a more detailed response. I will also comment on the false information still being posted on here that is contrary to the evidence given before the trial and at the trial.

The simple facts are:
1 Tina should never have been allowed to dive the Yongala.
2 Gabe should never have been allowed to dive without supervision as he also did not qualify to dive unsupervised according to Mike Ball Expeditions own rules (which have to be abided by under Queensland law).
3 The Queensland Police investigation was disgustingly bad.
4 Tina panicked and then Gabe panicked and he made the wrong decision to try to get help.

Hopefully Tommy, Cindy and Alanda Thomas can accept this verdict and try to get on with their own lives without still looking at Gabe as the person responsible for Tina's death.

Please note: the case was not dismissed, rather the judge ACQUITTED Gabe. A big difference.
 
As a person heavily involved in this matter the past couple of years, and with full access to ALL the evidence, and having sat through a lot of the evidence in the court and been giving advice on diving related matters to the defence, I have a lot of comments to make about this case. When I get time I will log a more detailed response. I will also comment on the false information still being posted on here that is contrary to the evidence given before the trial and at the trial.

The simple facts are:
1 Tina should never have been allowed to dive the Yongala.
2 Gabe should never have been allowed to dive without supervision as he also did not qualify to dive unsupervised according to Mike Ball Expeditions own rules (which have to be abided by under Queensland law).
3 The Queensland Police investigation was disgustingly bad.
4 Tina panicked and then Gabe panicked and he made the wrong decision to try to get help.

Hopefully Tommy, Cindy and Alanda Thomas can accept this verdict and try to get on with their own lives without still looking at Gabe as the person responsible for Tina's death.

Please note: the case was not dismissed, rather the judge ACQUITTED Gabe. A big difference.

Many of us came to similar conclusions. My thinking was influenced to a large extent by the thoughtful presentation of the facts on your website. Thanks for your efforts.
 
As a person heavily involved in this matter the past couple of years, and with full access to ALL the evidence, and having sat through a lot of the evidence in the court and been giving advice on diving related matters to the defence, I have a lot of comments to make about this case. When I get time I will log a more detailed response. I will also comment on the false information still being posted on here that is contrary to the evidence given before the trial and at the trial.

The simple facts are:
1 Tina should never have been allowed to dive the Yongala.
2 Gabe should never have been allowed to dive without supervision as he also did not qualify to dive unsupervised according to Mike Ball Expeditions own rules (which have to be abided by under Queensland law).
3 The Queensland Police investigation was disgustingly bad.
4 Tina panicked and then Gabe panicked and he made the wrong decision to try to get help.

Hopefully Tommy, Cindy and Alanda Thomas can accept this verdict and try to get on with their own lives without still looking at Gabe as the person responsible for Tina's death.

Please note: the case was not dismissed, rather the judge ACQUITTED Gabe. A big difference.
Welcome back Clownfish...look forward to your comments!
 

Back
Top Bottom