BRISBANE, Australia — In her final moments, amid the terror and confusion, it isn't difficult to imagine the question that must have howled in Tina Watson's petrified mind. Fifteen metres underwater and with her oxygen supply cut off, the dying novice scuba diver had looked to the person she trusted most - her husband of 11 days and an experienced diver and rescuer - to save her from the unthinkable. Instead, he swam away. Why? It's the same question many Australians and Americans, including Tina's family and friends, are now asking - demanding - from Queensland authorities after the man who admitted letting his new bride perish at the bottom of the Great Barrier Reef while on honeymoon five years ago was ordered to serve just 12 months behind bars. With good behaviour, Gabe Watson, 32, will be back in the arms of his second wife in time for the next northern summer. The 12-month sentence, delivered in the Brisbane Supreme Court on Friday, sent a ripple of shock across the Pacific that has quickly built to a tide of anger in Tina Watson's hometown of Alabama. Her father Tommy Thomas said outside court there had been no justice for his 26-year-old daughter, and it seems many others agree. Queensland Attorney-General Cameron Dick has asked to see Justice Peter Lyons' sentencing remarks with the view to appealing the punishment, while US authorities have also expressed their outrage over the leniency of the jail term. Alabama's Attorney-General Troy King has also vowed to lead a mission to Queensland to lobby for an appeal. If he isn't successful, he will push "America's legal boundaries to the limit" in an attempt to have Watson charged with murder for a second time when he is deported back to the US upon his release in 11 months' time. When examined, no fault was found with Tina's breathing equipment. How she lost air supply has never been proven, and in June last year at the conclusion of a coronial inquest into her death, Coroner David Glasgow said only two people knew what happened to her: Tina and Gabe Watson. Only one of them is still alive. In his findings, Coroner Glasgow said a jury, if properly instructed, may have concluded Watson had turned off the air valve on his wife's air cylinder until she suffocated, switched the air back on, and let her sink to her death. He was charged with murder. But unlike a jury, a coroner does not need to be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt on the evidence. If the Department of Public Prosecutions had pressed ahead with a murder charge and proceeded with a jury trial, it's possible Watson may have been acquitted and walked free. How the DPP reached the decision to accept Watson's plea to the lesser offence of manslaughter was never discussed in open court. What Crown prosecutor Brendan Campbell did say in the court room was that Watson's manslaughter plea was accepted on the basis that Watson failed in his duty of care for his wife as her dive buddy. An experienced diver with a search and rescue dive qualification, Watson had performed a rescue years before when a fellow diver got into trouble underwater. But on his honeymoon in October 2003, Watson said he panicked and thought it best to surface and seek help from a diving instructor. Mr Campbell said by doing so he had "virtually extinguished any chance of her survival." The Crown had pushed for a harsher sentence than the one Watson received. But not by much: five years to be suspended after 18 months. Instead, Watson was handed four and a half to serve 12 months, taking into account the 23 days he had already spent in custody awaiting Queensland justice. Watson's barrister Steve Zillman successfully argued for leniency on the grounds that: - Watson had made admissions to police which ultimately formed the foundation of the Crown case. - He bore no responsibility for the delay of the matter through the court system. - Although he was not charged with an offence until June last year, when he was charged with Tina's murder following a coronial inquest, Watson's case had had to endure "intense publicity in the media ... thousands of words have been written on the internet (and he) had been publicly accused of a crime he was not guilty of." | 
