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.

 

[Underarrest_]

Yep it does leave it open for a couple of scenarios doesn't it. I wonder where exactly Lynn stated he was camped on 20th; it seems he must have given some detail to detectives, because of the sketch Lynn had prepared. But that sketch might be correct for the 1st night, but what about his 2nd night?

If Lynn did not have any loo facilities, he may have moved closer to the long-drop location? The river camp site as drawn up by Lynn, was a fair way from the long-drop.

He had a pull-down awning attached to passenger side of his 4wd didn't he? I haven't read anything that indicated the witness that observed what they say was the blue Nissan Patrol at the long-drop location, also observed the box trailer there.

I was more thinking that GL might not have had a camp (as such) set up at the site when Hill set up camp and GL has set up camp there later that day. I can’t see Hill setting up camp 50m away from a hunter with rifles/shot guns (with what happened to his nephew,) and wanting to have a nice, quiet, relaxing time with his friend. It’s too close for comfort and there’s a lot of countryside to choose from if you rock up at your favourite location and another camp is set up 50m away.

 

[TapRuck]

You know, if Hill had the knife in his hand and Lynn had hold of his arm and forced the knife into him, is that murder?

Self defence IMO. As soon as a deadly weapon is produced in an altercation, the person without the knife is technically fighting for their life. Fight or flight at it’s purest IMO.

 

[Lady O]

Self defence IMO. As soon as a deadly weapon is produced in an altercation, the person without the knife is technically fighting for their life. Fight or flight at it’s purest IMO.

Maybe, but if Hill picked up the knife because Lynn was armed with a shotgun, and was inside the cab of his truck, who is the aggressor then?

 

[Terrafirma]

Yes I have

You telling porkies

 

[Romaine Calm]

Evidence aside - much of this case comes down to what a reasonable person would believe a reasonable person would do.

Will a jury of reasonable people believe that two people died by accident within minutes of each other and the only other person at the scene survived and then went on to destroy all evidence that proved their story?

One accidental death perhaps, two is not just a stretch but an almost impossible possibility.

If you can’t accept that both were accidents Lynn’s entire case falls apart.

Has there ever been a recorded case of two people dying by accident of different causes within minutes of each other?

If both were accidents there was a need to preserve evidence.

Not destroy it.

Agree, I can see the complexities for the Jury potentially locking a person up for life because their story has inconsistencies however a Jury must be intregrous, the evidence must be the whole truth … two accidental deaths or murder IMO. I feel this case is quite unique.

 

[Iretired00]

If Lynn gets away with this the future problem is that it sets a pro forma for those that murder and have the luxury of time before arrest to form a narrative that fits the circumstances/scene of the crime.They will know to destroy every speck of evidence that might hold them accountable.He is a smart guy but even then didn't think of absolutely everything with his tall tale.Not everyone is that smart.

 

[Spectrix]

• don’t believe GL’s whole story, too fanciful to be 2 x accidental deaths within minutes
• but find certain elements of his story do line up with evidence (available evidence)
• don’t believe he has set out to murder two people
• just doesn’t add up that this calm and law abiding ‘pilot’ person on trial would ‘murder’ two people

"Don't believe GL's whole story". Only one verdict if that's the case, guilty murder X 2.

IMO

It is not that black and white.

Jurors may find Lynn's story is, as suggested above, a little too fanciful but that the prosecution have not proved their case beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[thumbs_up]

It is not that black and white.

Jurors may find Lynn's story is, as suggested above, a little too fanciful but that the prosecution have not proved their case beyond reasonable doubt.

I disagree IMO. Let's find out, potentially a verdict in the next 24-72 hours.

 

[Terrafirma]

If Lynn gets away with this the future problem is that it sets a pro forma for those that murder and have the luxury of time before arrest to form a narrative that fits the circumstances/scene of the crime.They will know to destroy every speck of evidence that might hold them accountable.He is a smart guy but even then didn't think of absolutely everything with his tall tale.Not everyone is that smart.

He's had a lot of luck with this case. I dont believe anybody believes he is innocent too many far fetched aspects of his story. He is a detached killer IMO and its sickening to think he could walk away from this. The legal system in this case favors the killer not the dead. Clay & Hills family will get no justice. If he walks we can only hope Karma comes to the rescue.

 

[Terrafirma]

Pray for justice tomorrow wverybody we may need divine intervention IMO

 

[Spectrix]

I disagree IMO. Let's find out, potentially a verdict in the next 24-72 hours.

Or a hung jury, because several jurors are of the opinion that prosecution have not proved their case beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[thumbs_up]

Or a hung jury, because several jurors are of the opinion that prosecution have not proved their case beyond reasonable doubt.

How could you possibly know that?

 

[FrankGrimes]

Or a hung jury, because several jurors are of the opinion that prosecution have not proved their case beyond reasonable doubt.

If it’s a hung jury we are at least a week away

 

[Underarrest_]

I don’t know if I’m looking at this the right way, but the way I see it, they have evidence that it was GL’s shotgun that killed Ms Clay. In GL’s own words, he didn’t see Hill’s finger on the trigger. GL has then proceeded to destroy any evidence of a so called accident (the campsite), (not to mention the destruction of bodies.)
The knife, what knife? The only evidence of any weapons being used is gunshots, as GL has stated, several were fired.

 

[Badd0g]

There are also pictures that were allegedly taken by an attending police officer (1s day) that show what appears to be be a lengthy rope lying on the ground. from the positioning of the rope, could that have been strung up from the other side of the vehicle to trees adjacent to where the aerial had been strung up from the rear of RH vehicle?

I don't see a lengthy piece of rope in either of those pictures.

 

[Badd0g]

I have another one, It was allegedly (from GL’s account,) light enough from the fire and lantern for Hill to see the gun and ammunition but dark when Hill came at GL with the knife (but could see the steel flashing.)

And no moon that night. So dark that he had to use a torch to clean up the campsite and remove evidence. I wonder just how long he spent cleaning the blood spatter off the inside of the canopy because it seems he did a damn good job of it (in the dark)

 

[theouthouse]

OK, so if I was in GL situation and worried about losing all I had in terms of job, exclusive clubs etc because of improper storage, I would concoct a story where my guns were stored securely but broken into by RH.

Maybe leaving the keys in the car while I went to the long drop, as it was about 10pm and the other camp were very quiet. Then when I was coming back I've seen RH walking to his camp with what looked like one of my guns.

Would that still count towards a firearms offence?

You're posting as if you haven't. Lynn has already admitted to breaching firearms safety regulations.

 

[Kurve]

Would that still count towards a firearms offence?

Probably not if it could be proved.

 

[Kurve]

And no moon that night. So dark that he had to use a torch to clean up the campsite and remove evidence. I wonder just how long he spent cleaning the blood spatter off the inside of the canopy because it seems he did a damn good job of it (in the dark)

He's so good at cleaning up it's a bit creeepy suss I reckon.

 

[Iretired00]

Maybe leaving the keys in the car

Interesting scenario you've proposed,this would have been a better story than the one he concocted,however as far as the keys I know insurance companies draw a distinction between theft and burglary as far as claim acceptance.There actually has to be a forced entry ie burglary for them to come to the party with many types of claims otherwise they say you made it " too easy " for the crim.I wonder how that go's with keys for gun storage.I personally would never leave my gun safe key in an unlocked situation.

 

[Underarrest_]

OK, so if I was in GL situation and worried about losing all I had in terms of job, exclusive clubs etc because of improper storage, I would concoct a story where my guns were stored securely but broken into by RH.

Maybe leaving the keys in the car while I went to the long drop, as it was about 10pm and the other camp were very quiet. Then when I was coming back I've seen RH walking to his camp with what looked like one of my guns.

Would that still count towards a firearms offence?

Maybe he thought it would be too unbelievable that Hill would risk time looking for the keys.
Come to think of it, how did Hill know it would be that easy to take the shotgun. Wouldn’t he have thought he might have to find the keys/padlock code to the gun bag first. He was certainly going to go to extremes to take this shotgun, with little light and no torch and at the risk that GL was nearby.

 

[Spectrix]

OK, so if I was in GL situation and worried about losing all I had in terms of job, exclusive clubs etc because of improper storage, I would concoct a story where my guns were stored securely but broken into by RH.

Maybe leaving the keys in the car while I went to the long drop...

So RH has broken into the car, or you left the keys?
Breaking into a locked car to steal a firearm in order to take it to the police because the firearm owner was breaking the law?

I mean I can't see RH stealing the firearm in any scenario, let alone a break & enter to aid a theft in order to take the evidence to the police, or whatever he was planning to do with it. It's ridiculous.

 

[hathound]

Jurors may find Lynn's story is, as suggested above, a little too fanciful but that the prosecution have not proved their case beyond reasonable doubt.

I would wonder what directions the judge would give about considering GL's story. In order to find him guilty, do they need to find beyond reasonable doubt that his story is not credible, in the same manner that they need to find that beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty? It seems the same thing, but is it really the same thing?

I read somewhere a couple of pages ago in a post that jurors would need to decide if they believed GL's story or not. This seems a very subjective test. I get the feeling that for cases like this, this is how individual jurors might be deciding to vote. This case is a bit different in that it is an established fact that GL was at the crime scene, so I guess apart from telling the truth from the beginning, he had to have an alternative story in that he was not the murderer. I am only guessing as I have never been on a jury (I have seemed to have miss the boat on that one unfortunately). If this is the case, I surmise that they are basing their "test" on a balance of probabilities.

 

[Spectrix]

In order to find him guilty, do they need to find beyond reasonable doubt that his story is not credible, in the same manner that they need to find that beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty?

I don't believe so.
My understanding (and I may be wrong) is that it is only up to the Prosecution to prove their claim of double murder.

Lynns story offers an alternative to that claim (of which their could be many), and it may cast doubt on the Prosecution's version of events.

Like I said earlier, this case is not black and white. It's a million shades of grey.
The Prosecution's story is black.
The Defence's story is white.

The jury doesn't necessarily need to choose one or the other, but if they choose the black one, it equates to double murder.

As he finalised his instructions on Friday, Justice Michael Croucher told jurors the circumstances of the case meant there was "one narrow path to a unanimous verdict of guilty, but any number of paths to a unanimous verdict of not guilty".

Any number of paths is basically any shade of grey (or white).

 

[GladdyDee]

He's so good at cleaning up it's a bit creeepy suss I reckon.

Perhaps there wasn’t as much to clean as has been suggested but wanted to indicate there was.
Neatly done while they slept

Just to throw an open can of worms at the 11th hour.