Current Trial Russell Hill & Carol Clay Pt 2 *Pilot Greg Lynn Guilty for the Murder of Carol Clay

[Kurve]

Here is PART 1 Russell Hill & Carol Clay - Wonnangatta *Pilot Greg Lynn Pleads Not Guilty to Murder

DPP v Lynn [2024] VSCA 62 (12 April 2024) INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL​

R v Lynn (Rulings 1-4) [2024] VSC 373 (28 June 2024)​

R v Lynn (Rulings 5 & 6) [2024] VSC 375 (28 February 2024)

R v Lynn (Ruling 7) [2024] VSC 376 (8 May 2024)

The Greg Lynn Police Interview Tapes (Shortened Version)

The 3.5 HR Police Interview

THREADS FOR THE HIGH COUNTRY DISAPPEARED
High Country Disappearance of Prison Boss David Prideaux
The Disappearance of Warren Meyer

2008 - Warren Meyer (23 March 2008) not found
2010 - Japp and Annie Viergever (29 March 2010) both shot & 3 dogs, house burnt.
2011 - David Prideaux (5 June 2011) not found
2017 - Kevin Tenant (17 February 2018) shot 3 times, played dead.
2019 - Conrad Whitlock (29 July 2019) not found
2019 - Niels Becker (24 October 2019) not found
2020 - Russell Hill and Carol Clay (20 March 2020) murdered

Lynn's first wife Lisa, was found dead on 26 October 1999.

 

[Finknottle]

You’re missing the point. I’m not querying what the motive is. I’m suggesting the ambiguity in the jury instructions on motive could be leading to confusion and why the jury is struggling to reach a verdict.

Think about it. Judge directs the jury that the prosecution does not need to prove motive for the murders. And then instructs them that motive might be a factor in weighing up guilt or innocence.

I’m sure the Judge is correct in what his directions are but as a layperson on a jury you could be forgiven for thinking WTF.

And I wouldn’t over think it any event. What’s more likely? He’s some sort Dexter-type or thrill killer? Or just a hot headed, grumpy, middle aged man that couldn’t control his temper in argument with a septuagenarian?

Lynn strikes me as cold and calculating. What kind of person would think about his club memberships after he had just been involved in a double homicide? Not someone really affected by the gravity of the situation. Assuming he made up his story to hide murders what kind of person would concoct a defence where fear of losing club memberships figured prominently? He has some incredibly twisted values but he knows what he is doing.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Lynn strikes me as cold and calculating. What kind of person would think about his club memberships after he had just been involved in a double homicide? Not someone really affected by the gravity of the situation. Assuming he made up his story to hide murders what kind of person would concoct a defence where fear of losing club memberships figured prominently? He has some incredibly twisted values but he knows what he is doing.

Being a narcissist isn’t a crime. And what you’re suggesting came after the fact. It’s not a motive for the alleged murders.

If you want to discuss his motive for destruction of evidence that’s different.

 

[Finknottle]

Being a narcissist isn’t a crime. And what you’re suggesting came after the fact. It’s not a motive for the alleged murders.

If you want to discuss his motive for destruction of evidence that’s different.

Fair enough. I like your Dextor type / thrill killer. BTW, Dextor was a great series.

 

[Dirh Semaj]

The physical confrontation happened about half way between RH camp and GL camp therefore about 25m. RH would have been on his campsite side of GL vehicle according to GL description.

All depends what accessory GL had played his music on. If it was a cassette tape or iPhone or whatever, it may have stopped by time RH reached GLs vehicle and that is why GL heard RH poking around his car.

I'm not sure i'm with you there...

Are you suggesting that as RH was approaching Lynn's car, the song was in the final chorus? Then just as he was grabbing the gun and amo from the car, the track that was playing loudly, ended. RH, looks up in a kind of Leslie Neilson Naked Gun moment, glances around, casually wanders back in his gymjams as if he's mistaken Lynn's car for a tree, loads gun, c@cks it releases safety and fires off a couple of rounds...

 

[revo333]

It's a shamble that a jury is asking that to the judge after a week of deliberating.

 

[revo333]

If outcome of both identical charges can't be agreed upon unanimously it is a hung jury isn't it? Then ODPP will need to consider a retrial and what charges Lynn would face, is that correct?

It's all turning into a bit of a show.

 

[revo333]

We better get a podcast episode today.

 

[gymjam]

Bit hard to film on the drone when in the middle of a fight for your life....

The drone footage was taken before GL returned to the Bucks camp site.

 

[gymjam]

I'm not sure i'm with you there...

Are you suggesting that as RH was approaching Lynn's car, the song was in the final chorus? Then just as he was grabbing the gun and amo from the car, the track that was playing loudly, ended. RH, looks up in a kind of Leslie Neilson Naked Gun moment, glances around, casually wanders back in his gymjams as if he's mistaken Lynn's car for a tree, loads gun, c@cks it releases safety and fires off a couple of rounds...

I am just trying out a scenario. Mistaken Lynn's car for a tree is ridiculous.

RH casually wandering back is also ridiculous.

 

[gymjam]

Using Lynn's mark up of the area, below:
View attachment 2028770

Can you please mark up this aerial view of Bucks Camp (Lynn's camp, Hill's camp)?

View attachment 2028774

No problemo.

 

[thumbs_up]

It's a shamble that a jury is asking that to the judge after a week of deliberating.

Not really. They're given so much information, it would be overwhelming. Good on them for asking clarifying questions.

 

[Earls Smother]

It's a shamble that a jury is asking that to the judge after a week of deliberating.

Agree. The trouble is, jurors are just a range of normal people. They are not trained in the legal system.

My bet is, most of them have decided on a verdict. They are trying to persuade the hold out/s. They might even explain things to the hold out/s and get frustrated when they don't accept what they are being told. Hence going to the judge for reinforcement. It doesn't mean that all 12 need that instruction from the judge.

It would seem that they are caught up with evidentiary 'proof'. Happy to find guilt on CC because of the physical evidence of the shotgun slug, but reluctant on RH. The judge sees this as flawed - if one was murder then the other one will be too.

Unfortunately, GL only had to create doubt with 1 juror with his nonsense. So far he has succeeded.

 

[thumbs_up]

It would seem that they are caught up with evidentiary 'proof'. Happy to find guilt on CC because of the physical evidence of the shotgun slug, but reluctant on RH. The judge sees this as flawed - if one was murder then the other one will be too.

What?? Where do you get the idea that if one was murder then the other has to be as well? They have two separate charges to deliberate on, not a two for one special.

 

[gymjam]

CC could have grabbed a kitchen knife for self protection as she was cowering near passenger side and that is where all kitchen gear was stored including cooking stove and fridge and plates and food and incruments. When RH checked on her life status he may have then grabbed the knife from her hand or ground if she had dropped it, and then made his way towards GL yelling at him, she's dead, GL was at this time was making his way back to his vehice.

 

[Finknottle]

CC could have grabbed a kitchen knife for self protection as she was cowering near passenger side and that is where all kitchen gear was stored including cooking stove and fridge and plates and food and incruments. When RH checked on her life status he may have then grabbed the knife from her hand or ground if she had dropped it, and then made his way towards GL yelling at him, she's dead, GL was at this time was making his way back to his vehice.

Or Lynn might have shot Hill in a murderous rage and then shot Clay to shut her up and eliminate any witnesses. i.e. Lynn's whole story is a furphy. It is so wrong to try to explain this in terms of a concocted story from the accused. That is what the defence wants you to do. The prosecution didn't want to go down that path and I understand why. The truth died along with the victims.

 

[Earls Smother]

What?? Where do you get the idea that if one was murder then the other has to be as well? They have two separate charges to deliberate on, not a two for one special.

Why would you murder the second person if the first one was an accident? There is simply no logic to that. GL and the remaining person would call for help and do what they could. The scene would be left as untouched as possible to verify the accident. The remaining person would presumably attest to the accident and be an ally to GL's version. He wouldn't lose all his ridiculous memberships if a genuine accident happened.

Now if the first one was murder, you'd be drawing a very long bow to then say the second one was an "accident". To find the first one as murder, you'd have to believe that GL is lying in his version. So common sense would say that he is lying in the second instance also.

I didn't say that "the other has to be as well". I said the judge would see it as flawed in a legal sense to find one of each verdict. That would be to assume GL lied in regards to one death, but not the other.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Why would you murder the second person if the first one was an accident? There is simply no logic to that. GL and the remaining person would call for help and do what they could. The scene would be left as untouched as possible to verify the accident. The remaining person would presumably attest to the accident and be an ally to GL's version. He wouldn't lose all his ridiculous memberships if a genuine accident happened.

Now if the first one was murder, you'd be drawing a very long bow to then say the second one was an "accident". To find the first one as murder, you'd have to believe that GL is lying in his version. So common sense would say that he is lying in the second instance also.

I didn't say that "the other has to be as well". I said the judge would see it as flawed in a legal sense to find one of each verdict. That would be to assume GL lied in regards to one death, but not the other.

Yes, I have posted similar thoughts. It doesn’t make sense to cover up two accidents, or even one. As you say, if the first (either RH or CC) was a genuine accident you would be so shocked and remorseful you would get help immediately and explain what happened. The survivor would back you up, even if it came out that there was misuse of a weapon. You would just have to wear the consequences, which still wouldn’t be as serious as a murder charge.

That’s what any decent human being would do, imo.

 

[Finknottle]

The thing you have to remember is Lynn had 8 months after the killing of Hill and Clay to concoct and perfect his story. They died in March and he came back to burn their remains in November. In Lynn's own words "The fire burned from sunrise to sunset". Shortly after that Lynn was arrested

 

[Earls Smother]

The thing you have to remember is Lynn had 8 months after the killing of Hill and Clay to concoct and perfect his story. They died in March and he came back to burn their remains in November. In Lynn's own words "The fire burned from sunrise to sunset". Shortly after that Lynn was arrested

Yes, and the "one narrow path" to a guilty verdict is to disbelieve his story. That applies to both deaths. The jury can't half believe him on one death and not the other.

.

 

[thumbs_up]

Yes, and the "one narrow path" to a guilty verdict is to disbelieve his story. That applies to both deaths. The jury can't half believe him on one death and not the other.

.

Ok, when you put it that way it makes sense that that they should either find him guilty of both or neither.

 

[GladdyDee]

Being a narcissist isn’t a crime. And what you’re suggesting came after the fact. It’s not a motive for the alleged murders.

If you want to discuss his motive for destruction of evidence that’s different.

Definitely a narcissist but not smart enough to hide the fact. A dumb narc he is.

 

[Lady O]

Ok, when you put it that way it makes sense that that they should either find him guilty of both or neither.

Finally!!

 

[Poppy Penny]

Even with a guilty verdict, Lynn will appeal, and we will have to endure more of his BS and lies again.

 

[FrankGrimes]

Think the jury asking about motive doesn’t bode well

Even with a guilty verdict, Lynn will appeal, and we will have to endure more of his BS and lies again.

He will appeal but they can reject the appeal and it’s all over

 

[FrankGrimes]

I’m think asking about motive isn’t good for Greg, could be 1 or 2 holdouts.. im thinking guilty one 1 already and hung on the other.