So this guy is accused of killing his wife while on a dive trip in Australia on their honeymoon. Leaving aside the question of whether he did it, does this send up a bit of a red flag?
If your are concerned enough to lie about changing your insurance, why go through with the marriage? It makes no sense.
Future spouses of both sexes often make weird demands before and during the marriage. Financial demands are common but it can also involve controlling moves like cutting down time spent with existing children. If the person is very in love yet just a little sensible, they may just try to sneak around the demand to keep the peace. Transferring life life insurance to the fiance to become the new beneficiary only seems horrible if you know what is going to happen later. It sounds like she realized he was being a dick but probably just thought it was controlling behavior that she could easily avoid.
She should have seen it as a very bad sign but, for every one of these cases, there are many more who simply want to establish dominance before they get married.
It only sounds bad to me now that we know what happened to her. We got married almost a year ago, and haven’t got around to it yet, but I want my husband to increase his life insurance and make me the main, if not sole, beneficiary. Isn’t that what you do when you get married, unless there are other kids around and such?
We had a member here (I don’t remember who) that once expressed the same sentiment as the killer in the story. The female had kids from a previous marriage with some benefits going partially to them. He believed that he was the omnipotent super-husband and all of her assets should go through him should something happen. He would take care of her kids :wink :wink in such a situation. It was beyond chilling but at least people handed his ass back to him. I don’t think anyone has been murdered over it. Some people just think that way and others try to put up with it any way they can. I would never, ever do that myself and the whole thought of this infuriates me but others many have become accustomed to it from their parents or others.
I agree with this–barring a lack of other red flags, that alone would probably not trigger too much alarm. My husband and I both set each other up as sole beneficiaries as soon as we were married, and had as much insurance as we could afford to carry.
I’m betting there were other red flags, though, that she either deliberately ignored, or just failed to see because of being in love with him. We’ll probably never know.
It’s not the demand, it’s not doing it and then lying about it. If she was that concerned, why marry him? Would your husband do that? If he did, what would you think?
It’s not the request, but that she lied about complying. The fact that the request seems reasonable only underscores my point. Again, if this was a concern, why go through with the marriage?
Is there more witness testimony or other evidence corroborating the grieving father’s testimony about the insurance?
Not as far as I know, so perhaps I am hanging a bit too much on it.
I’ve never been married. Maybe even if the story is true it isn’t all that weird. I just have this romanticized idea of marriage being the coming together of two kindred spirits, etc., and can’t understand how one could enter into such an arrangement with a major lie already having been told.
Heck, maybe it’s not a major lie. Again, I have no experience in the matter.
Sure, ideally, but you never really know what goes on between two people. And there have been zillions of cases of people knowing that they shouldn’t marry someone and going through with it anyway, for a zillion reasons.
Maybe she didn’t lie to her future husband/murderer out of fear or trepidation , but because she was a procrastinator who just didn’t get around to it before the wedding and just didn’t want to get chided about it. I can see how, in the run up to a wedding and a big trip, you might just not get around to doing everything you need to do, and you might fib about it a little to keep the peace…after all, she figured she had plenty of time, right? Otherwise she would have done it and made her dad or someone else the beneficiary.
Yeah, sometimes people get married for other reasons- to keep family pressure down, to have someone to help with the kids, it’s good for the career, they want to grow old with somebody, it’s “the thing to do”, etc.
Here here.
The life insurance thing goes to motiove, but it’s not the basis for the charges. From the linked article:
He see’s his wife sinking with her arms outstretched and he (the experienced diver) decides to go for help instead of going down after her? I find that utterly incredible. If my wife is going down, I’m going down after her. There’s nothing that could make me just ditch her like that. I don’t care if I drown too, I’m going down after her.
That, along with the fact that there was nothing wrong with her equipment, nothing wrong woth her medically, the fact that he appears to have altered his story with the police, that he won’t show up for the inquest…all that’s enough to justify an arrest, I think.
This article suggests there might be more evidence:
A circumstanial case, maybe, but I just can’t get past his claim that he deserted his drowning wife to “go get help,” without even trying to rescue her himself. Either he killed her or he’s the king of all assholes.
Life insurance is not the kind of thing that comes up right before a wedding, and my wife and I never even had any discussions about until after we had our first child. Then we put each other down in our job policies as beneficiaries, but the discussions had the tenor of “I need to do this for you,” not “you need to do this for me,” and this discussion didn’t occur at all until we already had a decade of trust invested in the relationship.
Yes, this part seemed incredible to me too. What husband who loved his wife would do that? It makes no sense.
You are so right. Grab wife, give her your spare regulator. If she panics hit BC.
Very weird. If your air goes (or is turned off :eek: ) Even the most inexperienced diver will beat fins to the surface if someone isn’t close. ALL new set ups have an additional regulator on them so you don’t even have to buddy breath anymore.
If her BC filled with water, he could have still pulled her to the surface.
ye gods, mrAru’s family and I split the insurance - he has 2 nephews and a niece so this way the get a boost on the college fund. Mainly I get the farm all paid off and about enough to get a decent small car. Basically, his original insurance still goes to his family, he added the policy that pays off the farm and adds some money. They get about the same equivalent amount that I do. I think he has another smaller account that goes to his mom and brother, but I am not entirely certain - I never asked.
I am not claiming this is “so” but in a weird backwards defense of the Victim I will say I am not sure she ever said anything of the kind.
The Defense said: There is no motive to this 2003 Murder
The Prosecutor says: Her Dad says she told him that he wanted her to increase/switch her Life Insurance but she secretly didn’t
Her Dad says in 2008: the family welcomed Friday’s result as backing their suspicions about Watson. “We’re actually relieved to hear the coroner’s findings,” Thomas said. “It’s something that we have dealt with for quite some time and it validated our beliefs.”
Huh.
Again not saying this is so, but based on this on the Jury I would ask the same thing about this motive in the jury room deliberations that Contrapuntal did.
I am not claiming this guy is innocent. I would prosecute. I am just saying based on the evidence in this report one answer to the OP is: Maybe she didn’t say this
Jeez, don’t you think establishing dominance through financial means before marriage is in itself a very bad sign?
I read some Dateline story on this case. There were a couple of other things that were interesting:
Here’s the longer story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24713499/