Current Trial Russell Hill & Carol Clay - Wonnangatta *Pilot Greg Lynn Pleads Not Guilty to Murder

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #44
MOD NOTICE

This case is sub judice as under consideration by the courts. Sub judice contempt can occur if information is published that may be prejudicial to the court proceedings.

Please do not state as fact that which is opinion. Also, use 'IMO' and 'allegedly' a lot.

Rules - Updated Crime Board Rules - READ BEFORE POSTING

General Information The BigFooty Crime board is a community that fosters discussion on current and past crimes, some which have social and media notoriety, that attracts the attention of public opinion and discussion on such matters. Please read these rules very carefully, both the Big Footy...
www.bigfooty.com
www.bigfooty.com

On the Greg Lynn committal proceedings Crown Prosecutor Mr Dickie said 'It is clear hopefully from the document, and if it's not clear from the document it's clear hopefully from the charges put before the court, that it is alleged of course that the accused acted with murderous intent when he allegedly killed the two victims.'
 
Last edited:
Don't think there is anything new to report on the case and that's the reason it's gone quiet. So from the last hearing we learn't a gun was used, Lynn has pleaded NOT GUILTY, Lynn will claim something as to why he used his gun and the Police have plenty of covert evidence on Lynn which the defense has yet to receive. The judge said it was unfortunate Lynn's defense had not received a brief on the evidence given the time that has elapsed. I believe the Police are buying time which doesn't mean they don't have enough yet necessarily, they believe they can get more. The way it sits with me is there was an altercation and because of this Lynn used his gun to kill Clay and Lynn. Obviously Lynn will argue he had to use his gun in self defence. Firearm forensics will play a massive part of this trial and therefore it will become very technical like the Claremont killings. In cases of real self defense most of the time the killers don't proceed to burn evidence, burn the bodies and attempt to hide the remains. Murderers do though..!

His post offence behaviour will sink him. The DPP is clearly building out a case that means they won’t even have to rely on that as a central prong in their prosecution.

If it’s a stipulated fact that a firearm was used to murder both victims GL is going to have one hell of time proving at least one of those wasn’t premeditated.
 
His post offence behaviour will sink him. The DPP is clearly building out a case that means they won’t even have to rely on that as a central prong in their prosecution.

If it’s a stipulated fact that a firearm was used to murder both victims GL is going to have one hell of time proving at least one of those wasn’t premeditated.

Its up to the coppers to prove premeditation in the justice system. Not up to the defendant to prove there was no pre meditation.
 
Its up to the coppers to prove premeditation in the justice system. Not up to the defendant to prove there was no pre meditation.

I’ve watched law and order too
 

Log in to remove this ad.

My best mates Dad's neighbours cousin is a prison guard there and reckons the guards are fed up with Lynn yelling out "Cabin Crew – Arm doors and cross check" every time they lock down the cells for the night.
AWAKENING: you win the internet tonight ;)

That was GOLD :)

Medal to you 🥇
 
Despite speculation on BF, police can confirm Hill and Clay were shot, not run over in their tent.

We knew they were shot from the last hearing. The last hearing said the ballistics expert would play a crucial role. The judge also said he has a very good idea on what Lynn will claim. Something along the lines of self defense is what I would expect. The 770 Page Brief sounds huge so there is a huge amount of work ahead for the defense team given he has pleaded not guilty. I would expect they were shot near their campsite after the confrontation and therefore it was burnt to conceal the evidence of the shootings. Off course he will say he shot Hill 1st in self defense but why did he have to shoot Clay.?

P.S. 11 witnesses will be called and It is understood police had already placed listening devices throughout the alleged killer's vehicles and home with a view to listen to how he reacted to the media hysteria. They also have a mountain of phone transcript recordings. Will be interesting to find out what he said or was he involved in an argument with his wife over the media reports?
 
Last edited:
There were a few people weren't there that suggested they were run over in their tents? Or was it just one.? :think:

It was just a theory as to how it might be played as an accident, or was an accident. Did you lock it in Dogs_R_Us ?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

didn’t he end up in hospital because of a bee sting? Story goes something like this;

becomes a bee keeper. Doesn’t realise he’s allergic to bee stings

gets stung tending to his hive. Has an anaphylactic reaction ends up in hospital.

Life’s passion of bee keeping now in turmoil. Comes to resent bees.

takes off to clear his head and try and forget about his lifelong passion of bee keeping

Sets up camp. Hears the drone which triggers his bee sting PTSD. Takes out the 12 gauge has a pop at it. Doesn’t check his background and takes out both Russ and Carol.

flips out. Realises no one is going to believe this story. He hardly believes it himself.Burns down the camp, gets rid of the bodies and gets the hell out of there.

seems plausible 😂

My theory gains credibility every day
 
How about he shot them in the tent while they slept, totally unprovoked?
Or shot them them, then put them in the tent and tried to incinerate it to make it look like a freak camping accident. The burns on the 4WD indicate some accelerant was used to draw the heat to the vehicle. That would be a total novice attempt to destroy the site entirely.

When that didn’t work he had to take the next steps.
 
Or shot them them, then put them in the tent and tried to incinerate it to make it look like a freak camping accident. The burns on the 4WD indicate some accelerant was used to draw the heat to the vehicle. That would be a total novice attempt to destroy the site entirely.

When that didn’t work he had to take the next steps.
Bullets surely would be recovered from the bodies. And he did incinerate it. But it was never going to burn bodies.
Wouldn't he be wanting to clear up and clear out asap? Where were the zips off the sleeping bags?
 
Bullets surely would be recovered from the bodies. And he did incinerate it. But it was never going to burn bodies.
Wouldn't he be wanting to clear up and clear out asap? Where were the zips off the sleeping bags?
I guess that's what the ballistics expert is there for. The burning of the tent must have been due to evidence, or why do it? There was always a risk that someone would see the fire and put it out before the evidence was destroyed. The zips and the sleeping bags are probably still together in another unknown location.
 
We don't know yet if bullets were found however the remains/bone fragments would have yielded a ballistic trajectory and most likely a caliber. They know they were shot so they have obtained that information from the remains or from Lynn. The judge has said he knows what Lynn is claiming so I suspect Lynn has argued self defense. Now it's up to the judge via ballistics and firearm forensics to determine if that was true? Like I've said before Self Defense but why Carol Clay if Lynn's only real motive was this? Off course Lynn never planned on getting caught and Clay was collateral damage IMO. If it were real self defense Lynn wouldn't have shot Clay if Hill produced a gun etc? We can expect Hill didn't back down during the altercation.
 
We don't know yet if bullets were found however the remains/bone fragments would have yielded a ballistic trajectory and most likely a caliber. They know they were shot so they have obtained that information from the remains or from Lynn. The judge has said he knows what Lynn is claiming so I suspect Lynn has argued self defense. Now it's up to the judge via ballistics and firearm forensics to determine if that was true? Like I've said before Self Defense but why Carol Clay if Lynn's only real motive was this? Off course Lynn never planned on getting caught and Clay was collateral damage IMO. If it were real self defense Lynn wouldn't have shot Clay if Hill produced a gun etc? We can expect Hill didn't back down during the altercation.

Maybe they got the specifics from Lynn but I expect given he got rid of the trailer, that he probably also got rid of the gun?

Not that I've ever shot anybody but if I had and wanted to avoid accountability or make it difficult for the police to pin me with it, I would scatter it in parts.

Hotham maybe. Any steep cliff would do, in bits. Not all at once.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top