[turbanator]

Well it's in the public domain, so I guess we can talk about it as if we were in the pub.

There has been a discussion Gabe Watson Thread already, but that was in 2008.

Expert witnesses are now saying that the amount of air used is consistent with the time Tina Watson was recovered, so may not have had her air turned off - yet testimony of witnesses appears pretty clear-cut.

Opnions anyone?

Usual rules apply, remember Tina Watson was a real person, and until he's possibly convicted, Gabe Watson is innocent (of murder, he's already served 18 months in Oz on a manslaughter charge) until proven otherwise.

 

[Brian of Aquanauts]

Doctor thought Gabe Watson was trying to help wife on scuba dive:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/doctor-thought-gabe-watson-was-trying-to-help-wife-on-scuba-dive/story-e6frg6so-1226273747837

 

[copperband]

Well it's in the public domain, so I guess we can talk about it as if we were in the pub.

There has been a discussion Gabe Watson Thread already, but that was in 2008.

Expert witnesses are now saying that the amount of air used is consistent with the time Tina Watson was recovered, so may not have had her air turned off - yet testimony of witnesses appears pretty clear-cut.

Opnions anyone?

Usual rules apply, remember Tina Watson was a real person, and until he's possibly convicted, Gabe Watson is innocent (of murder, he's already served 18 months in Oz on a manslaughter charge) until proven otherwise.

hmmmm, newly weds...should Kirsty be worried?

 

[turbanator]

Doctor thought Gabe Watson was trying to help wife on scuba dive:

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Also in this article Carl Edmonds (Diving and Subaquatic Medicine), is for the defence.
I can't find it now, but elswhere, he's said that the amount of air she used indicates a panicking diver breathing heavily and there could not be that much air gone from the cylinder if her air had been turned off.

 

[Kirstie]

I don't have any life insurance, I feel safer that way

Not sure what I think about this. Murder's going to be pretty hard to prove given the circumstances and the time elapsed since the incident.

 

[Ian_6301]

First off, it's a tragic event.

Secondly, whether or not is was murder / manslaughter / negligence / etc is, quite clearly, a matter for the court to decide and I don't think that speculating here will help that (sorry Turbs et al).

I agree that it is an interesting case and were we in the pub, on the opposite side of the globe from the court, with no-one eavesdropping, I'd be happy to get amongst the details and would find it very interesting.

But...

As we know, things written on the tinterweb have a habit of staying there, being found by people and then cropping up in th most unfortunate of places...

So, is this a discussion that we should take offline, or at least behind the closed doors of the Incident Reports forum?

 

[Kirstie]

First off, it's a tragic event.

Secondly, whether or not is was murder / manslaughter / negligence / etc is, quite clearly, a matter for the court to decide and I don't think that speculating here will help that (sorry Turbs et al).

I agree that it is an interesting case and were we in the pub, on the opposite side of the globe from the court, with no-one eavesdropping, I'd be happy to get amongst the details and would find it very interesting.

But...

As we know, things written on the tinterweb have a habit of staying there, being found by people and then cropping up in th most unfortunate of places...

So, is this a discussion that we should take offline, or at least behind the closed doors of the Incident Reports forum?

It's currently being heard in a public courtroom and it's all over the papers (and probably the TV in America). I'm not sure discussing it here will jeopardise the case in any way.

 

[GSK]

hmmmm, newly weds...should Kirsty be worried?

should Paul be worried more likely!

 

[turbanator]

While I agree that it's a tragic event, and also we could move to the incident forum (Mods?), I think that as he has already been found guilty of manslaughter and this trial is on TV in the US and Aus, then things are in the public domain.

I strongly suspect that he would be treated better here than in the comments section of most newpapers, as many here have been involved in rescues and rescue attempts, so I suspect that we would sympathise with this case more than the average Joe.

 

[MRKYMARK]

reading carefully what happened, do you have to be a newly wed to do this?

a friend just asked me to ask...

 

[Jen]

It could be argued that the embrace was to remove air from her bcd ensuring that she didn't surface when unconscious. But if he did do it then that still doesn't explain why he did it in the presence of so many other divers.

 

[12480]

Gabe Watson 'had no interest in dying wife' Tina | News.com.au

http://www.news.com.au/world/honeym...dering-wife-tina/story-e6frfkyi-1226093499022

 

[petlowe]

Wish you lot would wait a few weeks until the evidence is in the public domain, what little I have read is interesting but for sure we are in front of the facts at the moment......

The close proximity of others is going to be one of the key points to it all but until we know more is it worth the electrons?

 

[John63]

I don't have any life insurance,.

That you know of..

 

[turbanator]

Well, here we go.

Case thrown out due to insufficient evidence.

 

[little nick]

Well - that was a turn up for the books

 

[Achie Boy]

H E SAWYER Man's Laughter

I'd draw your attention to the fact that the editors of both magazines that ran this article cut out all mention of Tina Watson and what happened at her grave.

 

[Jen]

H E SAWYER Man's Laughter

I'd draw your attention to the fact that the editors of both magazines that ran this article cut out all mention of Tina Watson and what happened at her grave.

Curiouser and curiouser. Why would he draw attention to himself with that kind of behaviour?

 

[BJ]

Why let evidence get in the way of a good YD lynching?

 

[Jen]

Why let facts get in the way of a good story?