Andrew Arrington, for the prosecution, said: “The problem is all the
times the defendant has lied. Why is he lying?”
He added that Watson had “doggedly pursued” what he thought was a
$130,000 (£83,000) life policy.
The jury of six men and eight women, including two alternate jurors, were
shown a photograph taken by a fellow diver of Mrs Watson’s body floating
lifeless on the sea bed near a shipwreck in the waters off Queensland. “The
last image of Tina is right here,” Mr Arrington said.
He told the jury they would hear from two witnesses on the dive who confronted
Watson about his wife’s death, telling him they did not believe him when he
said his wife had panicked.
But for the defence, Brett Bloomstom told the jury that the dive was a “perfect
storm” of bad decisions, accusing the trip’s organisers, Mike Ball
Expeditions, of making a series of errors.
He claimed that 26-year-old Mrs Watson had attained only a “green”
level of diving experience, but was allowed to go on the “red flag”
dive. She was not taken for an orientation dive, and had been given weights
which were too heavy for her body.
“This case is not about whether or not he could have saved her. It’s
whether he intentionally killed her, and he did not,” Mr Bloomstom told
the jury.
“They were in love and they planned their honeymoon and wedding. This is
a tragic case and what is more tragic is the blame Gabe has had to live with.”
Portraying the couple as happy and loving, Mr Bloomstorm claimed that Watson
had even surprised his bride with tickets to the Sydney Opera during their
honeymoon, leading her to cry tears of joy.
He denied that Watson had killed his wife in order to claim on her life
insurance, pointing out that it was her father who had been the beneficiary
of the policy. “He did not get a penny,” the lawyer said.
The case continues.
— Rosa Prince New York Correspondent telegraphmediagroup New York Bureau 584
Broadway, Suite 601 New York, NY 10012 T: +1 212-219-8131 C: +1 917-226-4727 www.telegraph.co.uk/rosaprince
Related posts:
Views: 0