Current Trial Russell Hill & Carol Clay Pt 2 *Pilot Greg Lynn sentenced 32 yrs with a non-parole period of 24 yrs

[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.

 

[gymjam]

It could all come down to inability of jurors to form a guilty decision... 11 out of 12. Then off for a retrial.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Not really, it's a largely misrepresentative mash up.

Basically just giving the thread a spray

 

[Sir_Loin]

It could all come down to inability of jurors to form a guilty decision... 11 out of 12. Then off for a retrial.

Better than an acquittal

 

[theouthouse]

I think you have misread the meaning of my post - I said if he only covered up their deaths in order to disappear (his story), he lost the reasoning for that when the cops rocked up at his door. At that point he had failed in his attempt to disappear and further tampering with their bodies could in no way be attributed to merely removing himself from the picture - he was fair and square in it by then. This is what Porceddu failed to put to him during the cross and it is now why Coucher is telling the jury to discount it.

I get what you mean but I think it is more to make sure in this case the i is dotted and the t is crossed from a legal sense.

Judge also said it as inferred in prosecutions questioning.

 

[Badd0g]

Don’t believe everything you read in the media.

Also, I wonder if the livability score of his suburb has gone down since his arrest?
“parks are nice but people sure have a terrible taste in car colour”

Don't believe everything you read on onthehouse - titles office states Jan 22. Nothing to see here.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Don't believe everything you read on onthehouse - titles office states Jan 22. Nothing to see here.

Do I have this right? Property transfer went through in Jan 22. Arrested November 21. How long does a property transfer take? Not that long under normal circumstances I’d assume. So either he put it on motion prior to his arrest or while he was in custody.

Only reason I think it’s vaguely interesting is that if it was close to his arrest date it might be one check list item he wanted to tick off before the SOG got him on his final trip to the high country.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

The more that comes out the more the doubt shrinks. Don’t forget Chris Dawson was convicted on NO tangible evidence, not even a body, but on the balance of probabilities. There’s much more evidence here.

The Chris Dawson is not a great example because its an example of a conviction that shouldnt be one on the evidence thats there. But i take your point.

 

[Badd0g]

So let me see if I understand this correctly.
We all like the judge, but his instructions to the jury - ‘oh no, GL might get off’.
Nobody on this forum has ever had any connection to GL, but ‘his story is so stupid, we can tell he is lying’.
DD is an amazing man to watch at work, ‘but how can he defend someone like that’.
The first his wife ever knew about this was when her house got raided at nighttime when she was at home with her kids, ‘but she’s so arrogant and sits up straight and waves at GL when he comes to court’.
DD confirmed there was issues with funding, ‘serves them right, leave them with nothing, they must pay’.
Their family home (and you’ve done searches, there’s not another one) has a caveat on it so it can’t be sold. If GL is found guilty, hoorah! That will show him!… but where will his wife and kids live?
The most at risk for homelessness? Women of age 50+. Which she is. With only a part time job and as has been discussed here: one son under 18, another who comes to court and has been seen in tears.
GL will have a roof over his head, ha ha! you say. What about them? Will you be taking them in?

Interesting first post - too close to home the discussion has hit, me thinks.
However, I don't think there is a person on this forum that doesn't have a deep level of sympathy for ML and their children: To come to the stark realisation that someone you thought you knew, loved and looked up to was capable of the things that he has done would be soul-crushing IMO. Absolutely, she and their children are victims of the actions of a man who thought only about what he had to lose. Your anger is misdirected, it's not the people on this forum that have put them into the position they now find themselves in, is it?

 

[Badd0g]

Do I have this right? Property transfer went through in Jan 22. Arrested November 21. How long does a property transfer take? Not that long under normal circumstances I’d assume. So either he put it on motion prior to his arrest or while he was in custody.

Only reason I think it’s vaguely interesting is that if it was close to his arrest date it might be one check list item he wanted to tick off before the SOG got him on his final trip to the high country.

Lodged & recorded 21st Jan 22

 

[Sir_Loin]

Lodged & recorded 21st Jan 22

So no caveat by the police at that stage. Can we see what date it was lodged?

 

[Sir_Loin]

The Chris Dawson is not a great example because its an example of a conviction that shouldnt be one on the evidence thats there. But i take your point.

I think the laws in NSW are slightly different to VIC. Also it held up on appeal so no issues on law or fact. Conviction completely safe.

 

[Kurve]

So no caveat by the police at that stage. Can we see what date it was lodged?

My understanding is that the cops couldn't put a caveat over property unless there was an interest in proceeds of crime?

 

[Badd0g]

I wonder if it cost them the (not insignificant) stamp duty on transfer..in my experience, spousal transfer is only duty free on relationship breakdown!

Spousal transfer consideration can be non-monetary (natural love and affection) - no duty is payable if it is the principal place of residence.

 

[Sir_Loin]

My understanding is that the cops couldn't put a caveat over property unless there was an interest in proceeds of crime?

Not sure of the process but I guess my underlying point was he clearly made the move to protect the asset from any sort of seizure.

At what point is it recognised that there’s an interest in proceeds of crime? Hasn’t been convicted. When can the police slap a caveat on the property.

 

[Badd0g]

So no caveat by the police at that stage. Can we see what date it was lodged?

9/12/22

My understanding is that the cops couldn't put a caveat over property unless there was an interest in proceeds of crime?

Appears to be under the Confiscation Act

 

[Kurve]

Not sure of the process but I guess my underlying point was he clearly made the move to protect the asset from any sort of seizure.

At what point is it recognised that there’s an interest in proceeds of crime? Hasn’t been convicted. When can the police slap a caveat on the property.

Yep, they'd be concerned family of the victims might make a claim. Of course Mrs.L isn't responsible for what he's done so her share should be safe.

The cops can tie property up at the point of charges but I've never heard of them doing it outside of 'proceeds of crime'.

 

[CredibleSauce]

I’m thinking there’s a whole lot more evidence that has been deemed inadmissible. And had to be scrapped.

Remember much earlier on, the reporting of explosive evidence that DD sought to have excluded.

It’s reported there were more than 3,000 separate conversations captured by surveillance devices placed in his home, phone and vehicle.

He had a habit of talking to himself while driving in his vehicle. It’s more than likely he would have used these GL:GL drive-time opportunities to discuss with himself how things went down that night.

He would have been re-hashing details, playing if-only scenarios and all manner of other things.

We all agree he had plenty of time to rehearse and finesse his version of events, so I’m proposing that this fantabulous story is a product of these drive time chats.

I’ve not heard any mention of these recordings being submitted as evidence.

The burning question is… was he also using these chats as a mobile confession-booth?

And will these tapes or transcripts ever he released?

Reeks of another high profile (alleged) murder case where the perpetrator is going largely unpunished

In the coronial inquest, which was split into two halves in 2018 and 2022, police played audio which detectives alleged was of Mr Laurie, singing of how he "killerated" Mr Moriarty with a claw hammer. Mr Laurie denied it was him singing on the secretly recorded tapes.

Australian judicial system: “oops he says it wasn’t him, pack ‘er up then boys must be nothing to see here.”

Honestly makes me a bit sick to think about.

 

[Spectrix]

So let me see if I understand this correctly.
We all like the judge, but his instructions to the jury - ‘oh no, GL might get off’.
Nobody on this forum has ever had any connection to GL, but ‘his story is so stupid, we can tell he is lying’.
DD is an amazing man to watch at work, ‘but how can he defend someone like that’.
The first his wife ever knew about this was when her house got raided at nighttime when she was at home with her kids, ‘but she’s so arrogant and sits up straight and waves at GL when he comes to court’.
DD confirmed there was issues with funding, ‘serves them right, leave them with nothing, they must pay’.
Their family home (and you’ve done searches, there’s not another one) has a caveat on it so it can’t be sold. If GL is found guilty, hoorah! That will show him!… but where will his wife and kids live?
The most at risk for homelessness? Women of age 50+. Which she is. With only a part time job and as has been discussed here: one son under 18, another who comes to court and has been seen in tears.
GL will have a roof over his head, ha ha! you say. What about them? Will you be taking them in?

Wow, no messing about for your first post and I think you raised some very valid points.

Something that I found really interesting in today's proceedings was the judge's instructions to each member of the jury, and I think some of us in this forum could benefit from taking note here:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Jurors were reminded to overlook any sympathy, bias or prejudice as they determined the case.

The judge said that included ignoring any "great sympathy" they may naturally feel for the deceased lovers or their loved ones, any belief their secret affair was "morally wrong" or any feeling that Mr Lynn's behaviour in covering up their deaths was "terrible".

"You must weigh the evidence logically and with an open mind, and not according to your passions or feelings or personal judgements about what is morally acceptable or morally unacceptable," the judge said.

"Your function and your duty is to use your heads, not your hearts."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted from this abc article.

 

[Irma]

Ive heard GL has a large stock of Jetstar gloves. Could raise a bit flogging them on scumtree!

SOLD! To a random man, who’ll pick them up in his random trailer which he bought off a random guy in April 2020.

 

[champagnegirl]

Wow, no messing about for your first post and I think you raised some very valid points.

Something that I found really interesting in today's proceedings was the judge's instructions to each member of the jury, and I think some of us in this forum could benefit from taking note here:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Jurors were reminded to overlook any sympathy, bias or prejudice as they determined the case.

The judge said that included ignoring any "great sympathy" they may naturally feel for the deceased lovers or their loved ones, any belief their secret affair was "morally wrong" or any feeling that Mr Lynn's behaviour in covering up their deaths was "terrible".

"You must weigh the evidence logically and with an open mind, and not according to your passions or feelings or personal judgements about what is morally acceptable or morally unacceptable," the judge said.

"Your function and your duty is to use your heads, not your hearts."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted from this abc article.

I don’t agree. The people on this forum aren’t commenting in the role as an appointed Juror. The Moderator’s very clear instructions regarding what cannot or should not be said are being respected.

If our emotions are on display, I think that only adds to the humanity and morality of being able to fully consider other people’s thoughts. We’re not empaneled. Thank goodness!

It’s like comparing apples with oranges quoting the Judge’s instructions to the Jurors and expecting members of a public discussion group to tailor their thinking towards being compliant with the Judge’s instructions. As long as we’re mindful
of the legal discussion restraints, which is demonstrated, then I think it’s ok to say how we see things. We’re not in court.

It is a democratic brain storming platform with members being able to toss around theories, experiences, opinions, and yes even judgements and emotions. But in the main, they have been qualified judgements, and certainly not legal opinions.

Except where some very savvy members have that knowledge and have been able to offer their views which I have found of great interest.

Some of the facts presented have certainly taken me to the dark side of some human behaviour so it is quite uplifting to know there is a common thread of decent and good people out there.

Actually, I have been surprised by the level of restraint and clarity shown by the majority of the members. And the level
of highly intelligent, well thought out comments put forward for discussion has been very interesting. And more importantly, thought provoking without being prejudiced.

A member commented that they would feel a bit disappointed and sad once the discussions have been concluded on this topic and I wholeheartedly agree.

My comments are in no way meant as a criticism. Rather, they are an observation offered that is based on personal feelings.

 

[revo333]

Whilst I hope he gets at least 1 x murder charge against him I've come to the conclusion that his life is gone as he knows it.

And while he was on the stand his sons were probably listening and losing all respect for him knowing that most of his version of the event is bs.

 

[revo333]

I wish people would stop talking manslaughter..it is OFF THE TABLE, and there is no possibility in this trial that it will be an option in this trial. It is noise that is not helping an otherwise informed debate here. Both Prs and Dann submitted they didn't believe manslaughter was a valid outcome if murder could not be proved...and J. Croucher fully concurred, despite his initial instructions to the Jury in his opening address...after seeing the evidence, His Honour stated there were no grounds for findings of manslaughter. Thus, there is only one outcome...murder (1 or 2) or nothing, and he is "free"..of conviction, but never again a normal "happy" life. IMO.
Eagerly await today's outcome, and the directions given to the Jury in the Judge's charge.
Anyone present in court (or viewing the feed), please keep us updated!!!

So he won't get anything at all for what he did to the bodies and the crime scene?

 

[revo333]

2 x murder IMO.

Yes please

 

[thumbs_up]

GL will have a roof over his head, ha ha! you say. What about them? Will you be taking them in?

Perhaps you could take them in.

 

[revo333]

What ever the verdict, the misadventures of Greg Lynn are not over.

They did not start in March 2020.

They will not end in June 2024.

What ever the verdict appeals will drag on for years.

Lynn will face many more months, over many years in court.

I’m not just referring to the wash up from these proceedings.

The only good news is for those of us who have followed this thread compulsively and enjoyed the banter and argy bargy will have many more years of insightful posts and lively engagement.

The bad news, which is the most tragic aspect of all of this, is that for the families connected to Lynn, and I’m not just talking about this specific case, there will be little closure and I fear any sense of real and humane justice.

That is the one thing I am holding onto with regard to my trust in the jurors. They will be feeling the same set of emotions, even if they have been directed to not put weight onto to them. They invariably will.

But in the end, knowing what I know, I am confident that Lynn will not just walk away.

Karma will catch up with him, and my sense is it already has, even if the legal system may be slower to do so, it will eventually will as well.

Your posts in this thread have made me warm and fuzzy