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

R v Lynn [2024] VSC 635 (18 October 2024)​

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.

 

[Terrafirma]

Given the press reporting has been all over the shot do you think we (The Public) have been made aware of all of the evidence? I say this because the jury has but if we haven't obviously impossible for us to come to our conclusions of Guilty vs Not Guilty etc. I think the jury are studying the safety lock scenario of the shotgun with a view of understanding that you would need special knowledge to disengage the safety on that particular gun and RH would not of had that knowledge let alone be able to do that in the dark.

 

[10571z]

Given the press reporting has been all over the shot do you think we (The Public) have been made aware of all of the evidence? I say this because the jury has but if we haven't obviously impossible for us to come to our conclusions of Guilty vs Not Guilty etc. I think the jury are studying the safety lock scenario of the shotgun with a view of understanding that you would need special knowledge to disengage the safety on that particular gun and RH would not of had that knowledge let alone be able to do that in the dark.

It’s been confirmed Hill has previously owned fire arms.

He would know how a safety works

 

[GrayRanga]

What’s your thoughts on why GL was sneaking around the toilet tent? and fired a shot?

Dunno,

To take another person's life (or two in this case) is not the actions of a reasonable person, despite any personal justification they may invent or testify to

The prosecution has not forwarded any reason for the deaths which may mitigate Lynn's actions.

Lynn has stated in his ROi and Testimony his reasons for his actions, blaming Hill. Clay was collateral damage to Hill's actions according to Lynn.

Two people died and one died from a proven shotgun slug to the head (if you believe the skull fragment wasn't planted).

Remember, the issue of reasonable doubt is a double edged sword; the prosecution has stated it's position.

Lynn murdered both of them.

Is Lynn's story to be viewed to be an honest recollection of the events of that day and to be sufficient to be considered to create a reasonable doubt in the jury's collective mind?

Personally I don't believe that Lynn's narrative creates a reasonable doubt

It only gives an alternate but complex chain of events

Other than purely criminal murders or those with sexual undertones, most murders are as a result of somebody's actions or words being a physical, personal or perceived affront to someone else. The reasons behind most murders are banal and incomprehensible to most reasonable people faced with similar circumstances

I may have thoughts of the events of the day, but the jury isn't considering my thoughts

 

[Zidane98]

What’s the actual law of hunting near a “camp”

Must be 100m away

 

[10571z]

Must be 100m away

Where is this documented? Genuine question as I can’t find anything and asked 2 people with gun licenses who also weren’t sure

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

The judges comments that because of 2 accidental deaths lead to a guilty verdict was flawed has me worried. It's saying you can't find him guilty just because you don't believe 2 accidental deaths is likely. Everything seems to be favoring Lynn and I think he walks away a free man with time served enough to clear his post death actions. I really hope I'm wrong. In either case guilty or not guilty we'll never know how the jury came to the conclusion. The judge also mentioned something about satisfying 4 x elements of murder. Anyone know what the 4 elements of murder are?

Quote : " Justice Croucher told the jury their job was not to punish Mr Lynn for the “terrible and selfish” actions he had admitted to but to impartially judge if the prosecution had proven the four elements of murder for each death beyond reasonable doubt.

He said Mr Lynn was to be presumed innocent and for the jury to think two accidental deaths was improbable, was “fundamentally flawed”.

I don't see how the two can be separated. If Justin Stein can be disbelieved, so can Greg Lynn.

 

[Kurve]

It’s been confirmed Hill has previously owned fire arms.

He would know how a safety works

Hill's father left him a shotgun or a couple when he died but Hill handed them in. I don't know when he handed them in, if it was after the deer hunting accident or in response to the Howard buy back scheme after Port Arthur but I was left with the impression it was a long time ago.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Those elements are:

• A person's death was caused by an act performed by the accused
• The act causing death was performed consciously, voluntarily and deliberately by the accused
• The accused performed the act causing death intending to kill the other person or intending to cause that person at least really serious injury; and
• The accused performed the act causing death while not acting in self defence

Thanks. I think the jury can believe those four.

 

[10571z]

Hill's father left him a shotgun or a couple when he died but Hill handed them in. I don't know when he handed them in, if it was after the deer hunting accident or in response to the Howard buy back scheme after Port Arthur but I was left with the impression it was a long time ago.

If dad owned rifles and handed them down to son I dare say he would have had some father son experience along the way.

While that’s pure speculation I’d find it more unlikely than not dad didn’t show son who received the guns how they worked.

 

[gymjam]

Given the press reporting has been all over the shot do you think we (The Public) have been made aware of all of the evidence? I say this because the jury has but if we haven't obviously impossible for us to come to our conclusions of Guilty vs Not Guilty etc. I think the jury are studying the safety lock scenario of the shotgun with a view of understanding that you would need special knowledge to disengage the safety on that particular gun and RH would not of had that knowledge let alone be able to do that in the dark.

A possible scenario is that the safety lock may not have been engaged.

 

[Thats Ambitious]

Given the press reporting has been all over the shot do you think we (The Public) have been made aware of all of the evidence? I say this because the jury has but if we haven't obviously impossible for us to come to our conclusions of Guilty vs Not Guilty etc. I think the jury are studying the safety lock scenario of the shotgun with a view of understanding that you would need special knowledge to disengage the safety on that particular gun and RH would not of had that knowledge let alone be able to do that in the dark.

Nope, unless you were in the Court room for the full duration of the trial, you would not have heard or seen all of the evidence. The media focus on what will get clicks (such as the affair), and not necessarily what is relevant to the case at hand. This means the evidence we receive as the public is not only limited, but also subject to some bias.

 

[gymjam]

If dad owned rifles and handed them down to son I dare say he would have had some father son experience along the way.

While that’s pure speculation I’d find it more unlikely than not dad didn’t show son who received the guns how they worked.

Plus RH had mates who were shooters. And with the information that RH was discussing shooting/gun safety with other hunters who he had just met a week prior to 20th, in another close campsite, it seems he would have had pretty good knowledge of firearm safety.

 

[Kurve]

If dad owned rifles and handed them down to son I dare say he would have had some father son experience along the way.

While that’s pure speculation I’d find it more unlikely than not dad didn’t show son who received the guns how they worked.

Hill's daughter testified her father only went shooting once that she can remember, so this would be before he handed his guns in.

I've handled a few guns back in the day but I couldn't go straight to someone's car in the dark and take a cased one out, correctly identify it, then find the right ammunition, while the owner's only metres away, correctly load it and fire while I'm subsequently being chased down for it.

Now imagine I'm 74yo and I haven't even got my glasses on.

 

[Badd0g]

If dad owned rifles and handed them down to son I dare say he would have had some father son experience along the way.

While that’s pure speculation I’d find it more unlikely than not dad didn’t show son who received the guns how they worked.

Fair point but remember RH was in his 70s, guns were given before his father died iirc and his daughter testified that the last and only time she recalls RH handling a gun was in her teens (mid 80s). Wife says guns were handed in in an amnesty (guessing post PA, so late 90s). The accident happened in late 90s.So we are talking almost 30 years of not handling a gun and I'm guessing it probably wasn't a magazine fed one back then?

I find it highly improbably given all that, that he was familiar enough to be able to load it, cycle it and shoot it with ease.

 

[gymjam]

Where is this documented? Genuine question as I can’t find anything and asked 2 people with gun licenses who also weren’t sure

On Parks Victoria website. I have posted snips and links twice this week. https://www.parks.vic.gov.au/things-to-do/hunting

Where permitted, firearms, bows or crossbows cannot be fired for any purpose other than hunting deer. Firearms and bows must not be used (and must remain unloaded) within 100m of any designated camping area or designated picnic area.

 

[Terrafirma]

A possible scenario is that the safety lock may not have been engaged.

I believe it has been stated the safety was engaged.

 

[gymjam]

I'd say yes to both, interesting points another reason the shotgun being stolen is an unlikely scenario.
The repercussions for RH would have been quite severe, police don't mess around with unlicensed individuals being in possession of a firearm, often ends in jail time for the more severe cases.

in my scenario, I think RH highest level consideration would have been about safety issues regarding hunting and shooting not about his possible illegal actions taking possession of GL's firearm; because he displayed this consideration as a few witnesses have stated that RH had recently spoken to them about hunting and gun safety and about his nephew's death in a nearby area, due to a hunting accident and his nephew being accidentally shot by his cousin. It obviously had a great impact on RH and he was spreading the safety issues widely.

 

[Royces Hart]

in my scenario, I think RH highest level consideration would have been about safety issues regarding hunting and shooting not about his possible illegal actions taking possession of GL's firearm; because he displayed this consideration as a few witnesses have stated that RH had recently spoken to them about hunting and gun safety and about his nephew's death in a nearby area, due to a hunting accident and his nephew being accidentally shot by his cousin. It obviously had a great impact on RH and he was spreading the safety issues widely.

So as a big advocate for gun safety, he goes and does something unsafe and irresponsible with someone else’s gun?

Computer says no.

 

[Terrafirma]

Fair point but remember RH was in his 70s, guns were given before his father died iirc and his daughter testified that the last and only time she recalls RH handling a gun was in her teens (mid 80s). Wife says guns were handed in in an amnesty (guessing post PA, so late 90s). The accident happened in late 90s.So we are talking almost 30 years of not handling a gun and I'm guessing it probably wasn't a magazine fed one back then?

I find it highly improbably given all that, that he was familiar enough to be able to load it, cycle it and shoot it with ease.

I agree. The safety was engaged from press reports/ballistics etc which must of come from Lynn? (Not 100% on this) The court went to lengths to demonstrate that this particular shotgun did not easily accidentally go off with the safety disengaged. The other point of contention I find difficult is Lynn stated they wrestled over the gun and he also stated Hill wasn't trying to shoot him. So why was Hill's finger on the trigger and why was the safety disengaged? Also Lynn stated Hill fired 2 x shots off into the air? How many shots was this gun capable of without further re-loading? Point being if 2 x shots fired would Hill of had to reload the gun again for it to have been capable of shooting Clay?

 

[GreyCrow]

I don't buy he's worried about RH going to the police.. GL knows operating a drone in a national park is a serious offense. Only commercial operators are allowed to with a proper permit.

GL would know RH going to the police would be RH also tuning himself in.

Just 2 old campaigners yapping away

Nobody is going to the police

''i'm gonna report you to the cops ''

' yeah yeah tell them I'll be here till sunday'

 

[Royces Hart]

I find difficult is Lynn stated they wrestled over the gun and he also stated Hill wasn't trying to shoot him.

And if he didn’t think RH was trying to shoot him, why engage in a wrestle over the gun, where something could go wrong?

If your life isn’t in danger, back away, and phone it into the cops as soon as you can.

 

[Terrafirma]

So as a big advocate for gun safety, he goes and does something unsafe and irresponsible with someone else’s gun?

Computer says no.

Exactly. Lynn stated Hill wasn't trying to shoot him so why was his finger on the trigger and why was the safety disengaged and why was the gun loaded. Hill supposedly took the gun to disarm Lynn even though he left the rifle in Lynn's car. If Hill fired shots off into the air it would have been to empty the chambers IMO (Don't believe this story because Lynn was covering for shots he fired in the belief they would have been heard) At this point Lynn wasn't aware no witnesses heard the shots.

 

[Terrafirma]

And if he didn’t think RH was trying to shoot him, why engage in a wrestle over the gun, where something could go wrong?

If your life isn’t in danger, back away, and phone it into the cops as soon as you can.

For this to have happened Lynn must of instigated the wrestle to get the gun back

 

[Badd0g]

I agree. The safety was engaged from press reports/ballistics etc which must of come from Lynn? (Not 100% on this) The court went to lengths to demonstrate that this particular shotgun did not easily accidentally go off with the safety disengaged. The other point of contention I find difficult is Lynn stated they wrestled over the gun and he also stated Hill wasn't trying to shoot him. So why was Hill's finger on the trigger and why was the safety disengaged? Also Lynn stated Hill fired 2 x shots off into the air? How many shots was this gun capable of without further re-loading? Point being if 2 x shots fired would Hill of had to reload the gun again for it to have been capable of shooting Clay?

...and then someone had to reload/cycle the gun for it to be live and GL to fire it off again "to make it safe" after CC had been shot. (That's the bit I just can't reconcile).

If the struggle happened as GL says it did, RH letting go of the gun and rushing to CC could not have happened unless GL let him up - his testimony is that he had RH bent backwards over the bonnet with the gun between them when it went off. Didn't happen IMO

 

[10571z]

On Parks Victoria website. I have posted snips and links twice this week. https://www.parks.vic.gov.au/things-to-do/hunting

Where permitted, firearms, bows or crossbows cannot be fired for any purpose other than hunting deer. Firearms and bows must not be used (and must remain unloaded) within 100m of any designated camping area or designated picnic area.

Thanks.