GUILTY Australia - Tina Watson, 26, dies on honeymoon scuba dive, QLD, 22 Oct 2003

New Posts

What the hell was this judge thinking!!!! Someone called in to JVM and said they were intuitive and that the judge had been bought off. I don't think so, but it's a really shocking decision. The lawyers on JVM and JVM herself, have never heard of this happening before. :banghead:
 
JVM also pointed out that in all of his talking about all he's lost he never once said anything about losing his wife.
 
theBritster said:
"...an Alabama grand jury indicted Watson on two counts -- murder for pecuniary gain and kidnapping where a felony occurred. Those charges were based on the premise that Watson hatched the plot to kill his wife while in Alabama."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/23/justice/alabama-honeymoon-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_t1


What I don't understand is, how can there be enough evidence for a Grand Jury to indict him on a murder charge, but yet the judge can say there isn't enough evidence for a trial? Sorry to keep harping on and on but it blows my mind.
Click to expand...

I'm confused about that also.
 
It always amazes me how someone marries someone who was accused (and convicted in Australia) of murdering his wife. Boggles my mind. How do they sleep at night? :what:
 
theBritster said:
This makes me so angry! If charges were dismissed, can he still be tried for this again at a later date? Anyone know?
Click to expand...

I think her family can try him for wrongful death in civil court, like Ron Goldman's parents tried OJ Simpson in civil court. Hopefully if they do that, or even if they don't, karma will eventually get this guy for what he did.
 
I hope the Karma bus comes at FULL SPEED for both Gabe AND Casey.

This is the same jerk who was caught on camera cutting off flowers with bolt cutters at Tina's grave site and at the funeral made the remark about how at least Tina's breasts were perky.

low life 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
 
~n/t~ said:
It always amazes me how someone marries someone who was accused (and convicted in Australia) of murdering his wife. Boggles my mind. How do they sleep at night? :what:
Click to expand...

Me too! At the very least he didn't try and save Tina. Sure, the new wife could argue that he was scared and panicked, but isn't she worried he would panic and run if something was happening to her? I would be. :twocents:
 
Hi there, I keep thinking this is the same case which became a 'New Detectives' show a couple of years {?} ago as it was a prime example how a RECONSTRUCTION of the crime can solve the case.

What the Aussie LE did was perform a reconstruction with a stand-in playing a part of the deceased wife and then one for the husband {as he refused to take part}.

What LE learned was if her death had happened as the husband said it did, the wife would have ended up in a different spot on the ocean floor. I can't remember the specific details :banghead: but the show said this proved he was lying and that he was guilty.

Did anyone else hear about this reconstruction?


xox
 
scandi said:
Hi there, I keep thinking this is the same case which became a 'New Detectives' show a couple of years {?} ago as it was a prime example how a RECONSTRUCTION of the crime can solve the case.

What the Aussie LE did was perform a reconstruction with a stand-in playing a part of the deceased wife and then one for the husband {as he refused to take part}.

What LE learned was if her death had happened as the husband said it did, the wife would have ended up in a different spot on the ocean floor. I can't remember the specific details :banghead: but the show said this proved he was lying and that he was guilty.

Did anyone else hear about this reconstruction?


xox
Click to expand...

Australian Story did a story on this. There are 2 parts plus the dive reinactment. HTH

"Her husband Gabe was accused of murder but eventually convicted and jailed for manslaughter, amidst controversy over the role of the Queensland DPP"

http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/unfathomableone/default.htm
 
Rhyme & Reason said:
Did he really? I didn't know that. What a #$%^&*
Click to expand...

yes, he did. If Dateline replays the episode "Mystery in the Deep Blue Sea" you can see actual footage of him taking bolt cutters and destroying flowers from her grave site and then dumping them in the trash.

I'm sure they will update the episode and air it again.
 
iluvmua said:
yes, he did. If Dateline replays the episode "Mystery in the Deep Blue Sea" you can see actual footage of him taking bolt cutters and destroying flowers from her grave site and then dumping them in the trash.

I'm sure they will update the episode and air it again.
Click to expand...

Wow! I'll watch for a replay on Dateline.
 
Allusonz said:
Australian Story did a story on this. There are 2 parts plus the dive reinactment. HTH

"Her husband Gabe was accused of murder but eventually convicted and jailed for manslaughter, amidst controversy over the role of the Queensland DPP"

http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/unfathomableone/default.htm
Click to expand...
Whoa, You are one sharp Sleuther Allusonz ;} Thanks.

I'm sure it will tell why the info they learned in the reenactment wasn't enough to keep him in the pokey.
 
~n/t~ said:
It always amazes me how someone marries someone who was accused (and convicted in Australia) of murdering his wife. Boggles my mind. How do they sleep at night? :what:
Click to expand...

He wasn't convicted of murder in Australia, he was was convicted of negligent homicide. For a charge like that you don't need to have done anything wrong, rather it is for what you didn't do.

In the US people generaly don't get charged for that, you are not legally required to help.
 
scandi said:
Hi there, I keep thinking this is the same case which became a 'New Detectives' show a couple of years {?} ago as it was a prime example how a RECONSTRUCTION of the crime can solve the case.

What the Aussie LE did was perform a reconstruction with a stand-in playing a part of the deceased wife and then one for the husband {as he refused to take part}.

What LE learned was if her death had happened as the husband said it did, the wife would have ended up in a different spot on the ocean floor. I can't remember the specific details :banghead: but the show said this proved he was lying and that he was guilty.

Did anyone else hear about this reconstruction?


xox
Click to expand...

A reconstruction in this sort of situation proves nothing since there are no absolute reference points. At best it would serve as an aid to an investigation but it is hardly evidence.
 
It is easy enough to see why the judge ruled that way: there was apparently no motive. A central part of the state's case was that it was done for financial gain - that is what allowed them to claim jurisdiction for charges since they claimed it was a plot initiated in the US.

(from http://news.yahoo.com/honeymoon-killer-judge-scoffs-alleged-motive-151622500--abc-news.html)

"You mean to tell me that [Gabe Watson] bought the engagement ring, married her, he and his family paid for a wedding, he planned and paid for a honeymoon halfway around the world, all so he could kill her to get an engagement ring he bought in the first place?" the judge asked.
Click to expand...

and

Watson never received any money from his wife's insurance policy since her father was listed as the beneficiary. Watson had filed a claim for $10,000 in travel insurance to cover what he says would was the total cost incurred as a result of his wife's death in Australia.
Click to expand...
 
Tugela said:
It is easy enough to see why the judge ruled that way: there was apparently no motive. A central part of the state's case was that it was done for financial gain - that is what allowed them to claim jurisdiction for charges since they claimed it was a plot initiated in the US.

(from http://news.yahoo.com/honeymoon-killer-judge-scoffs-alleged-motive-151622500--abc-news.html)



and
Click to expand...

Objectively speaking I am not surprised by this ruling. I had issues with it going forward in the first place and suspected it had more to do with a DA that wanted a high profile case than solid evidence of murder. One witness even said they thought he was trying to save her...there just wasn't a lot there.

Do I think he did it? Probably..i could have voted for the Australian verdict but nothing I have heard so far suggests to me that the state made the case for murder, if anything..they rested far to early.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 73 more.
Total: 1,670 (members: 74, guests: 1,596)

Online statistics

Members online
74
Guests online
1,596
Total visitors
1,670
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
623,194
Messages
18,463,756
Members
240,306
Latest member
AmeliaClaira
Back
Top