iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Gabe Watson Acquitted: Judge Acquits Husband In 'Honeymoon Scuba Death'

Gabe Watson Tina Thomas Watson

JAY REEVES   02/23/12 10:03 PM ET  AP

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — A man who spent 18 months in an Australian jail for the drowning death of his wife during a diving trip in that country was acquitted of murder in Alabama on Thursday. A judge ended the trial with his acquittal ruling before the defense had even presented its case, saying prosecutors lacked evidence to prove Gabe Watson intentionally killed his wife.

Prosecutor Don Valeska, head of the violent crimes division for the state attorney general's office, said he never before had a trial end in a judge's acquittal in 41 years of trying cases, though that does sometimes happen, legal experts say.

Watson, 34, had faced life in prison without parole if convicted of murdering his wife of 11 days, 26-year-old Tina Thomas Watson, in 2003. The couple was diving on the Great Barrier Reef. Watson pleaded guilty in Australia to a manslaughter charge involving negligence.

Circuit Judge Tommy Nail agreed with defense arguments that prosecutors failed to show Watson drowned her for insurance money. The only eyewitness testified he thought Watson was trying to save the woman.

The state's evidence was "sorely lacking" and did not prove Watson had any financial motive. Jurors never got to deliberate.

"I don't think anyone knows for sure what happened in the water down there," said Nail, who repeatedly clashed with prosecutors during both the trial and earlier hearings.

Defense attorneys had argued that Watson didn't stand to gain anything monetarily because Tina Watson's father was the beneficiary of her life insurance policy. They contended her death was an accident.

Gabe Watson's father, David, hugged his son in the courtroom after the judge made his ruling. He said every court that had looked at the case determined Gabe did not intentionally kill his wife.

"I'm just so relieved. Hopefully he can put his life back together," David Watson said.

"I hope everyone can begin to heal. The rest of his life will determine his legacy. Gabe is a good kid."

Gabe Watson left the courtroom hand-in-hand with his second wife without commenting to reporters.

Tina Watson's father, Tommy Thomas, had testified earlier in the day. He described how his family's grief and shock over Tina Watson's death turned to suspicion of Gabe Watson.

Valeska, the prosecutor, walked with his arm around Tommy Thomas, who appeared to be in shock and stunned by the judge's decision.

"It should have gone to the jury for them to decide," Thomas said of the judge's decision.

Thomas had testified earlier that shortly after the death, his wife, Cindy, was worried about Gabe Watson's condition. However, evidence showed relations between Watson and his wife's family frayed quickly as the Thomases began having doubts about what happened and Gabe Watson began asking for Tina Watson's belongings.

Gabe Watson's father called to tell them about the woman's death more than 15 hours after she drowned, Thomas said, and Tina Watson's family never heard from Gabe Watson until they attempted to contact him through the U.S. consulate in Australia.

Thomas said that in a phone call from Australia, Watson claimed his wife gave him a thumbs up underwater, indicating she wanted to go back to the surface. Watson said he was leading her back to a rope when she panicked, knocked off his mask and air hose, and began sinking, according to Thomas.

But during a later talk at a lawyer's office, Thomas said, Watson changed his story and said the woman indicated she wanted to go back to the rope leading to the top rather than go directly to the surface. Staring directly at Watson from the witness stand, Thomas said he asked his former son-in-law at that time: "When Tina gave him the thumbs up sign to go to the surface, why didn't he just take her to the surface?"

The judge blocked Thomas from testifying about Watson's alleged desire to increase the woman's life insurance policy, a blow for prosecutors who earlier had been barred from presenting other evidence about Watson's actions after the death.

Montre Carodine, a law professor at the University of Alabama, said the judge's decision to end the trial without the defense even presenting evidence was a "serious indictment" of the prosecution's case, particularly considering it was a capital trial.

"It means the evidence was weak," she said.

PHOTOS FROM THE 'HONEYMOON SCUBA DEATH' TRIAL:
Tina Watson Scuba Diving
1  of  18
PLAY
FULLSCREEN
ZOOM
SHARE THIS SLIDE 
This photo was taken in Oct. 2003 and inadvertently shows Tina Thomas Watson (right) in distress on the ocean floor while scuba diving off the Great Barrier Reef. Her husband, Gabe Watson, was charged by the Alabama Attorney General's office with drowning her for insurance money, but was acquitted by a judge on Feb. 23, 2012.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CRIME

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — A man who spent 18 months in an Australian jail for the drowning death of his wife during a diving trip in that country was acquitted of murder in Alabama on Thursday. A judge...
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — A man who spent 18 months in an Australian jail for the drowning death of his wife during a diving trip in that country was acquitted of murder in Alabama on Thursday. A judge...
Filed by Michael McLaughlin  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,894
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (45 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
My Red Pony
Justice for Travis Alexander!
11:45 AM on 03/04/2012
All of my friends are divers and we’ve always thought he was guilty. I was gobsmacked that the judge acquitted him. But I think that it was because the prosecution had to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he had formed the idea to kill his new bride in his home state and add to that, the judge disallowed a lot of the evidence against him. I think most folks really believe he is guilty, but it’s impossible to prove what anyone was thinking. He got away with murder, but that’s becoming a trend these days.
02:58 PM on 02/29/2012
were diving*** not was diving!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Margaret Penny Wood
12:35 AM on 02/29/2012
When the truth came out that the beneficiary of the life insurance was the wife's father the prosecution had no case at all. They did not bring that out. The judge knew that as soon as the defense brought that point out the case would be over because there was no motive. It has to be a very poor case on the side of the prosecution for a judge to stop the trial before the defense even presents its case.
08:17 PM on 02/27/2012
The practice of law in the state of Alabama leaves much to be desired, to say the least. Frankly, it's downright embarrassing... a disgrace.

As I followed this trial, I was repeatedly amazed at the trial judge's rulings about the admissibility of evidence. He made numerous errors concerning hearsay rules, and virtually sabotaged the prosecution's case from day 1.

Of course the judge's acquittal was a "serious indictment" of the prosecution's case, and showed their evidence was weak... that's because the prosecution was blocked from presenting the most pertinent, relevant, and explosive evidence, by the same judge, using some of the most bizarre reasoning, logic, and rulings I've ever heard in a court of law.
02:33 PM on 02/26/2012
Prosecutors in general have no shame and use the taxpayers money with abandon to placate family members of dead people and get ehadlines, and the fact that a judge threw the case out shows that it never should have been brought to begin with. Prosecutors have virtual absolute immunity and can pervert justice without a backward glance, hoping for convictions no matter the truth.

Ruined lives and wasted resources are the hallmarks of most prosecutors, who care nothing about the evidence as long as they can sway a jury to believe even the most ridiculous stories, depending on the sad fact that most jurors are under-educated in legal matters and who believe that people who are arrested and charged are probably guilty anyway, a perversion of the system that is supposed to protect us.

When i har someone criticise or lambast defense attorneys, it rankles me because MOST prosecutors are shameless seekers of convictions and care little about actual innocence...just look at how many prosecutors fight tooth and nail to keep wrongfully imprisoned people in prison despite evidence of innocence..they never want to admit being wrong and will slap justice in the face to pretend to be faultless...sickening.
01:51 AM on 02/25/2012
Every Diver knows you drop the belt, pull your cords, inflate your vest and blow bubbles all the way to the surface. This is just very bizzare. There are a number of things that could have and should have been done to save her. Divers are taught to put masks back on under the water, you can also see under the water, painful as salt may be. The regulator is normally attached to the vest so if it falls out it can easily be retrieved, If panic sets in you punch the person and knock them out. All I know if it was my wife, I would have dragged her body, dead or alive, to the surface as quickly as possible and done everything in my power to save her.
01:08 AM on 02/25/2012
When reading the details of this story a few days ago something else popped into my mind...

Perhaps Mr. Gabe Watson was setup as a way for the scuba diver(s) in Australia to avoid responsibility.

It seems very suspicious that a man would go through all of this trouble to kill his wife in hopes to get $100k and not know the details of his wifes insurance policy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fenrir Lokison
I luv the sci fi of Evolution and the Big Bang
12:44 PM on 02/28/2012
That is an interesting theory.

But, then again, what if he is just a stupid criminal? What if he truly did not know and just had a presumption? Sometimes people don't know the full facts about the law, especially when it deals with state laws. He could of just assumed that just because he was her husband, her policy would just automatically default to him no matter what.

Or maybe he killed her because of it? Sometimes when a person's dream is bashed against the rocks, they may take out the person who foiled them.
10:39 PM on 02/24/2012
Also, if she didnt have any oxygen, why didnt he buddy share on his tank..if that were the case.
She's laying there on the ocean floor in the pic!! On my God! WHERE IS HER HUSBAND!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
omegas3
Is it an android you are or are you a quasar?
09:47 PM on 02/24/2012
He's innocent. If you doubt it go to law school, get your degree and move to Alabama and try him.. Oh,wait they threw it out.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bettyboop68
09:37 PM on 02/24/2012
I hope that it was an accidental drowning and not intentionally done and if he did do it the truth will come out.
07:04 PM on 02/24/2012
I am sure that somewhere an explanation has been provided. Can someone please tell me why he was tried in Alabama if he already spent time in an Australian prison and the crime that didn't happen occurred in Australia?
04:00 PM on 02/24/2012
The humidity in Alabama soaked into the judge's brain...hence his decision. There's a reason why the North won the war....DUH!
07:05 PM on 02/24/2012
Oh sweet Jesus. Is that bthe best you can do?
01:04 PM on 02/25/2012
Nope. But apparently your post is the best YOU can do!
04:18 AM on 03/18/2012
This was truly funny!
photo
Red45
We can turn the tide
03:15 PM on 02/24/2012
Given the evidence in this case, I believe the judge made a huge mistake.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fenrir Lokison
I luv the sci fi of Evolution and the Big Bang
04:06 PM on 02/24/2012
While I agree with you, I have to play Devil's advocate and ask...

What evidence?
04:17 PM on 02/24/2012
Didn't you know? These people consider triple heresay and behaviors they find peculiar to constitue evidence!
03:07 PM on 02/24/2012
Detectives look for these specific things when a man is suspected of murdering his partner.

1. Is he trying to collect insurance? Yes, travel insurance within 96 hours of her death. The husband dropped his lawsuit against the insurance co. when they said they wouldn't pay until they investigated his wife's death.

2. Is there a woman he is dating as soon as his wife his dead? Check

3. Does he show a bizarre lack of empathy for his newly deceased wife? Check
03:15 PM on 02/24/2012
1. He was trying to collect $10K in travel insurance that would have simply reimbursed him for what he and his family paid for the honeymoon.

2. If 5 years after his wife died is "as soon as his wife is dead", then you are right.

3. Being in too much shock to participate in CPR on your wife is not a lack of empathy.

CHECK MATE1
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jablonskimary
03:44 PM on 02/24/2012
1. I believe the travel policy was 45k, and he had asked his wife prior to their departure to change her policy to name him as beneficiary (145k). According to the family Gabe Watson believed she had done so. 3 phone calls to the insurance compay prior to their departure to verify that "scuba accidents" are covered is just a little bit creepy.

2. Don't know anything about when he started DATING his current wife.

3. He comes home with his wife's body not two weeks after her death and tells his ex-sister in law that he is moving on, he had his time to grieve in Australia and he is over the grieving process. Removal of flowers from her family from the grave. The insistence on getting her belongings so quickly after her death.

All very creepy indeed...in fact, I think he did it, but a lot of that evidence was not allowed in...so I guess the acquital was warranted.
04:12 PM on 02/24/2012
That's the kind of thinking that got OJ acquitted, so he could go on to kidnapping (by use with a deadly weapon). Obviously detectives in Australia and the US feel very differently than you. They looked at these facts: It's not normal or "simple" for someone to "try to" collect insurance before the burial, the husband was exchanging "steamy" love letters during his Australian prison stay, and was joking about his wife's chest being perky during the open casket part of the funeral. There should have been a trial when detectives from 2 countries think a murder has been committed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tall coolone
Professional know-it-all
03:19 PM on 02/24/2012
None of which proves a thing.
04:34 PM on 02/24/2012
It's not proof. It's what made the detectives from 2 continents suspicious. A trial by jury and not one judge is what people want for a suspected murderer.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fishtaco28
02:46 PM on 02/24/2012
Obviously if the judge dismissed the case the evidence was incredibly week. The prosecution should have known that they didn't have enough to get a convinction. Probably just another DA hoping for a big win to advance his political aspirations.
I am of the opinion that he may have done it. If the evidence isn't there then it isn't there though.
photo
Red45
We can turn the tide
03:16 PM on 02/24/2012
Judges make mistakes sometimes. Surely you know that.