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.

 

[MrsBlueSky]

Did the prosecution ask GL why he stole the cash to buy petrol and then used a credit card for accommodation where police later found blood from one of the campers?

 

[Zidane98]

Did Porceddu question GL at all on the stand about RH's death?

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Are there two separate murder charges? I’m guessing yes.

 

[champagnegirl]

Would the judge know more about the case than has been revealed in the trial?

I wonder if he’s indirectly directing the jury to find Lynn guilty

You might be onto something there. Judge has stressed that Jurors must use their heads, not their hearts. To me, that says loud and clear that putting aside the emotional motives given by Lynn for his actions, both the described demise of two innocent campers and the post death pantomime of horror, then the thinking brain has to wonder how in the world the events as described by Lynn, leading up to the killings and the subsequent killings, could possibly have happened. I know what I’m left with if I use that thinking.

 

[Lady O]

Didn’t the judge tell them not to take that into account?

Misquoted or misunderstood I think. He simply said

Post #19801

"This subsequent behaviour, if committed in the belief that he had murdered Mr Hill and Mrs Clay, is conduct the law calls incriminating conduct," the judge explained in summing up the prosecution case on Thursday.
[snip]
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."

 

[FranklinBluth]

Did Porceddu question GL at all on the stand about RH's death?

 

[Iretired00]

View attachment 2019143

I would have thought the question was asked by the pros....

" The breach arose from Mr Porceddu's failure to directly put to Mr Lynn that he covered up the campers' deaths because he believed he'd committed murder in cross-examination, despite relying on that allegation in his closing argument, the judge said.

"Had Mr Porceddu asked Mr Lynn these questions, Mr Lynn may well have been able to respond in a powerful and compelling way," he continued.

"Yet he has been denied that opportunity by the conduct of the prosecutor."

 

[Zidane98]

View attachment 2019143

Don't know if just me but I find that pretty unconvincing by Porceddu. Why not press him about the death via knife over inconsistencies? With GL on the stand he had the opportunity to dismantle the story about the knife killing RH.

 

[Iretired00]

Did the prosecution ask GL why he stole the cash to buy petrol and then used a credit card for accommodation where police later found blood from one of the campers?

Yes,and he claimed he didn't use the credit cards,saying he had limited recall of even taking them .From the last podcast iirc.

 

[justallyone]

Are there two separate murder charges? I’m guessing yes.

Definitely two separate murder charges. DP said not to consider them as a "job lot"

 

[GrayRanga]

I’m thinking guilty or a hung jury. I can’t imagine everyone agree that he is not guilty.

It sets a very very dangerous precedent if he gets off.

What dangerous precident?

Somebody accused of murder gets off because the prosecution case was not sufficient for the jury to find guilt?

Every criminal court case has the same issue, the Judge, Jury or Magistrate can only work with the evidence provided.

The prosecution cannot just pull evidence from their fundamental alimentary canal to ensure guilty conviction

 

[Zidane98]

What dangerous precident?

Somebody accused of murder gets off because the prosecution case was not sufficient for the jury to find guilt?

Every criminal court case has the same issue, the Judge, Jury or Magistrate can only work with the evidence provided.

The prosecution cannot just pull evidence from their fundamental alimentary canal to ensure guilty conviction

Agreed. That's a basic tenet of our justice system. Ignore it and the chances of innocent people being convicted increases greatly.

 

[thumbs_up]

What dangerous precident?

Somebody accused of murder gets off because the prosecution case was not sufficient for the jury to find guilt?

Every criminal court case has the same issue, the Judge, Jury or Magistrate can only work with the evidence provided.

The prosecution cannot just pull evidence from their fundamental alimentary canal to ensure guilty conviction

You're right, it's not a precedent but a template of how to get away with murder.

 

[thumbs_up]

I wonder how this trial would pan out if GL had have not taken the stand in court.

 

[10571z]

What dangerous precident?

Somebody accused of murder gets off because the prosecution case was not sufficient for the jury to find guilt?

Every criminal court case has the same issue, the Judge, Jury or Magistrate can only work with the evidence provided.

The prosecution cannot just pull evidence from their fundamental alimentary canal to ensure guilty conviction

What precedent?

That if you destroy absolutely every slither of possible evidence you’ll most likely get off.

 

[hathound]

Could the reason that the judge ruled that manslaughter is off the table, is that if the jury were to accept GL's version of events, this would amount to an accidental killing while defending himself. i.e Self defense.

I don't think this would not amount to manslaughter. So unless I am not understanding the burden of proof that would be required the meet the threshold of a manslaughter conviction, it would not be a fitting term to describe either the prosecutions version of events or the defense's version of events. So unless the jury were to make up their own version of events would be he only way to arrive at a conclusion it was manslaughter. This is why I think the judge has disallowed it.

In saying this, I don't know if it was the right decision for the judge to make (taking manslaughter off the table).It could also be grounds of appeal for GL if he is convicted of murder. Also I am not saying I believe GL's version of evets. In my opinion it is not impossible, so I am not sure it would be easy to say it could not say beyond reasonable doubt that it could not have happened the way GL has described it. This is beside the point for sake of this argument.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

What precedent?

That if you destroy absolutely every slither of possible evidence you’ll most likely get off.

Sliver

 

[GladdyDee]

Tick all your boxes and you’re home free is the dangerous precedent.
I wonder if the Jetstar gloves are one size fits all

 

[apivapieah]

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.

I truly hope so

On SM-S918B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Zidane98]

Could the reason that the judge ruled that manslaughter is off the table, is that if the jury were to accept GL's version of events, this would amount to an accidental killing while defending himself. i.e Self defense.

I don't think this would not amount to manslaughter. So unless I am not understanding the burden of proof that would be required the meet the threshold of a manslaughter conviction, it would not be a fitting term to describe either the prosecutions version of events or the defense's version of events. So unless the jury were to make up their own version of events would be he only way to arrive at a conclusion it was manslaughter. This is why I think the judge has disallowed it.

In saying this, I don't know if it was the right decision for the judge to make (taking manslaughter off the table).It could also be grounds of appeal for GL if he is convicted of murder. Also I am not saying I believe GL's version of evets. In my opinion it is not impossible, so I am not sure it would be easy to say it could not say beyond reasonable doubt that it could not have happened the way GL has described it. This is beside the point for sake of this argument.

Sounds like GL will be charged with manslaughter separately if he is found not guilty of murder.

 

[justallyone]

Sounds like GL will be charged with manslaughter separately if he is found not guilty of murder.

That option is not really possible. These are the Victorian rules for Double Jeopardy - https://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/num_act/cpajaoma201181o2011619/s17.html

 

[Lady O]

Sliver

Hope he isn't able to sliver out of these charges!

 

[theouthouse]

Didn’t the judge tell them not to take that into account?

The judge also said that it was implied in the prosecutions questioning. IE GL had already denied murder on the stand of both victims therefore any action involving questioning or action resulting from murder would be denied by GL, as much as GL has the right to remain silent and have anything he says used against him in a court of law.

I do believe the judge gave the jury the advice to take that assumption of covering up murder with a grain of salt to ensure justice is served correctly and the verdict is water tight, whatever the verdict, and no clause for appeal are given.

To me it hinted strongly at the Judge seeking a legally sound guilty verdict that can not be appealed.

These are the sorts of loopholes that need to be closed that top lawyers, who serve the law of justice above all else, to ensure are followed both for current day and precedence to uphold the strength and integrity of the justice system.

 

[MrsBlueSky]

Yes,and he claimed he didn't use the credit cards,saying he had limited recall of even taking them .From the last podcast iirc.

Do you know how he paid for the accommodation?
Or how the police knew he stayed there when they found the blood of one of the campers?