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

[Kurve]

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

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.'

 

[Badd0g]

I remember reading that about the radio club on the 19th also, can't remember where!

As you know it's a good 7-8hr drive from Melbourne to the Gatta, makes perfect sense that they would take it easy and stay a night up high.
I hate driving straight through unless I leave pre-sunrise to get in early enough to setup camp and relax, and I am much younger than they were. And there would be no chance I would do that then go back up Zeka just to come back the next day, insanity.

Yeah it doesn't make sense at all. Bit less than that for me, but even less for RH from Drouin. Still a return back up ZS seems off.

 

[Awakening]

That's my point...if his statement content is that explosive that it would be considered inadmissable in a trial, why wouldn't the defence take advantage of that? If he has incriminated himself in some way, wouldn't it make sense to move to have that removed from admissable evidence. Unless I am missing something - quite possible after a few wines!

Have a glass of water before bed, and leave water on your bedside table.

 

[Badd0g]

Have a glass of water before bed, and leave water on your bedside table.

Not that many wines, just enough to question my critical thinking

 

[nut]

Can someone clarify that RH had planned to travel to another camp site after Wonnangatta?

For some reason this makes me think a fight over a camp Site is less likely… I
Mean he had other camp spots to look forward to

unless

RH had staked his spot on his prior visit? maybe with a marque or something? his special spot for Carol? And GL had moved it and camped at the spot RH thought he’d claimed.

In defence of Greg Lynn … if he has acted in self defence and his story of Carol dying by gun shot whilst wrestling with Hill, and then have to fight Hill with a knife…. Then I could imagine someone in his situation, being a pilot, realizing that regardless of him proving it was in self defence .. he’d lose his job and life style….. and he decides to try and cover up the scene.


Not sure if I made sense …

 

[Badd0g]

Can someone clarify that RH had planned to travel to another camp site after Wonnangatta?

For some reason this makes me think a fight over a camp Site is less likely… I
Mean he had other camp spots to look forward to

Yup, his mate Rob talked with him on 20th about best routes to head out of the valley toward Dargo but given he was set up already, unlikely he meant that day.

 

[Dirh Semaj]

So far, is there enough evidence of guns, knives, covert surveillance, forensic evidence, actions consistent with murder for this case to go to trial?

 

[nut]

I reckon it’s a scene out of Fargo

 

[Zidane98]

Can someone clarify that RH had planned to travel to another camp site after Wonnangatta?

For some reason this makes me think a fight over a camp Site is less likely… I
Mean he had other camp spots to look forward to

unless

RH had staked his spot on his prior visit? maybe with a marque or something? his special spot for Carol? And GL had moved it and camped at the spot RH thought he’d claimed.

In defence of Greg Lynn … if he has acted in self defence and his story of Carol dying by gun shot whilst wrestling with Hill, and then have to fight Hill with a knife…. Then I could imagine someone in his situation, being a pilot, realizing that regardless of him proving it was in self defence .. he’d lose his job and life style….. and he decides to try and cover up the scene.


Not sure if I made sense …

Good point re: covering up to salvage his pilot career.

Let's assume the gun did discharge accidentally during a struggle, killed CC and then they both got into a fight to the death and GL turned himself in -

Would that be the end of his pilot career?

My understanding is any police criminal action and you are a goner as a pilot.

If that scenario were true there is a high chance he is charged and possibly convicted. Bye bye 280k / year Jetstar job.

 

[nut]

Good point re: covering up to salvage his pilot career.

Let's assume the gun did discharge accidentally during a struggle, killed CC and then they both got into a fight to the death and GL turned himself in -

Would that be the end of his pilot career?

My understanding is any police criminal action and you are a goner as a pilot.

If that scenario were true there is a high chance he is charged and possibly convicted. Bye bye 280k / year Jetstar job.

He would be stood down for sure …
But if he was found to be innocent and acting in self defence, then I’d assume he would get his job back.

Maybe he thought that the scenario he was in would look unbelievable? And he thought there was no way he could prove his innocence? So he took the gamble of trying to cover everything up?

 

[Zidane98]

He would be stood down for sure …
But if he was found to be innocent and acting in self defence, then I’d assume he would get his job back.

Maybe he thought that the scenario he was in would look unbelievable? And he thought there was no way he could prove his innocence? So he took the gamble of trying to cover everything up?

Quite likely he would be found guilty of manslaughter for CC's death anyway. End of the day both RH/GL would probably be found guilty of manslaughter if the story of accidental discharge due to fight between them causing CC'e death was true (and RH survived).

Good night pilot career.

 

[Longmembrey]

Is it possible he prosecution has any evidence they have not submitted that could break the case open or does it all have to be transparent now?

Hard to see a Jury finding him not guilty on circumstantial evidence alone, just in my opinion due to exposure of this case.

They have to handover all the evidence they have

 

[Pamcake1]

The prosecution hinted at not introducing the statements through the committal due to possible issues raised by the defence but it's the defence who made the request they be suppressed.

Lawyers for the man accused of killing campers Russell Hill and Carol Clay are fighting to keep his police interviews a secret from the public, fearing “explosive” information contained in the recordings could have a detrimental impact on any upcoming trial.

Defence counsel Dermot Dann, KC, told Melbourne Magistrates’ Court that pilot Gregory Lynn’s police interview, recorded at Sale police station over several days following Lynn’s arrest on November 22, 2021, should be suppressed as the contents are “explosive or may be seen as explosive in the eyes of readers or viewers”.

Defence lawyers push to keep Greg Lynn’s ‘explosive’ police interviews a secret

Lawyers fear “explosive” information contained in police interviews with Greg Lynn – the former Jetstar pilot accused of killing campers Russell Hill and Carol Clay – could have a detrimental impact on any upcoming trial.

www.theage.com.au

It's a fair bet that the explosive information is his confession/story that would be fairly gruesome to the public's ears and the defence want to drip feed the information in a trial contesting every single piece of it.
The story will then become a disassembled dry exercise in provable facts that bores the public & jury to tears.
He obviously coughed to killing them (saying I couldn't help it, it was an accident) and revealed the location of their remains (which I have consistantly maintained that he did at the time). This was no accidental killing.
It was always going to be a given that the defences lawyer would jump all over the length of the 4 day interrogation even if it was legal, with the laws having changed as to the questioning being no longer 24 hours only.
It's also a fair bet that what he said can be disproved by the prosecution and that he would have since refined his story with his new lawyer.
I believe that there is already enough for the judge to rule on it going to trial.
Of course I am as curious as the next bunny that we still do not know some of the evidence that the prosecution is keeping under wraps, let alone wanting to know the contents of the interview.

 

[Lady O]

Yup, his mate Rob talked with him on 20th about best routes to head out of the valley toward Dargo but given he was set up already, unlikely he meant that day.

Yes, I question how familiar he was with the area, from his previous work there, if he had to ask Rob how to get somewhere? Doesn't really add up. But the fact that he was moving on makes the proposed argument with GL about a campsite less likely.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I reckon it’s a scene out of Fargo

Only thing missing is a wood chipper

 

[BFew]

Show me the transcript of what was actually said by the prosecution before I believe what is being reported in the media.

Here's a new take on the accidental shotgun death of Carol Clay theory Herald Sun this morning.
The best I've seen so far.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecr...y/news-story/534199a54ad5ec63d280f29929c9bd78

'Inside story of the missing campers mystery​

The alleged murder of secret lovers Russell Hill and Carol Clay has been shrouded in mystery – now the court case hinges on a series of key questions.

Miles Proust
January 21, 2023 - 7:00AM'

'....
On Tuesday, the first theory of what led to the couple’s deaths was raised by Mr Lynn’s lawyer Dermot Dann KC.

He asked Victoria Police Forensic expert Mark Gellatly about a scenario in which Ms Clay was accidentally shot while the other men struggled over a shotgun.

“The two were wrestling over the gun causing an accidental discharge … which struck Ms Clay in the head while positioned on the near side of Hill’s vehicle,” Mr Dann said.

Mr Gellatly replied it could not be ruled out.
“Yes,” he said.
“It’s a possible explanation at this point.”

In documents released to the media on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Gellatly said investigators provided him with information that Mr Lynn had confronted Mr Hill and Ms Clay because he was “annoyed” about a drone they were flying in the campsite where they were both staying.

In the scenario put to Mr Gellatly, Mr Hill then allegedly grabbed a shotgun from Mr Lynn’s car before a struggle ensued and it was accidentally discharged, striking Ms Clay in the head.

Mr Lynn then fatally stabbed Mr Hill during a fight, documents allege.

Neither police nor prosecutors formally alleged that scenario took place but the fact Mr Gellatly was tasked to examine items, including both mens’ cars, based on that scenario, suggests it is one of the main working theories.
...'

 

[RICHOLEGEND12]

Here's a far more believable story:

"The frail 74-year-old man pounced on me like a jackal. Instead of just brushing him aside like a moth (which you'd think I could've easily done, being a much younger guy who carts around carcasses for fun), we engaged in a playfight that accidentally set off my shotgun. And ohhh boy, just my luck. In a forest so vast, guess where the totally un-aimed bullet ended up..."

Well its not really an unaimed bullet as such, being a shotgun. You wouldn't really want to be standing to the side of two people struggling over any gun, but a shotgun is even worse. Not saying that's what happened, but it is somewhat beleivable that you could get hit.

Does seem quite fargo-esque, whatever happened, as someone else said.

 

[Lady O]

Here's a new take on the accidental shotgun death of Carol Clay theory Herald Sun this morning.
The best I've seen so far.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecr...y/news-story/534199a54ad5ec63d280f29929c9bd78

'Inside story of the missing campers mystery​

The alleged murder of secret lovers Russell Hill and Carol Clay has been shrouded in mystery – now the court case hinges on a series of key questions.

Miles Proust
January 21, 2023 - 7:00AM'

'....
On Tuesday, the first theory of what led to the couple’s deaths was raised by Mr Lynn’s lawyer Dermot Dann KC.

He asked Victoria Police Forensic expert Mark Gellatly about a scenario in which Ms Clay was accidentally shot while the other men struggled over a shotgun.

“The two were wrestling over the gun causing an accidental discharge … which struck Ms Clay in the head while positioned on the near side of Hill’s vehicle,” Mr Dann said.

Mr Gellatly replied it could not be ruled out.
“Yes,” he said.
“It’s a possible explanation at this point.”

In documents released to the media on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Gellatly said investigators provided him with information that Mr Lynn had confronted Mr Hill and Ms Clay because he was “annoyed” about a drone they were flying in the campsite where they were both staying.

In the scenario put to Mr Gellatly, Mr Hill then allegedly grabbed a shotgun from Mr Lynn’s car before a struggle ensued and it was accidentally discharged, striking Ms Clay in the head.

Mr Lynn then fatally stabbed Mr Hill during a fight, documents allege.

Neither police nor prosecutors formally alleged that scenario took place but the fact Mr Gellatly was tasked to examine items, including both mens’ cars, based on that scenario, suggests it is one of the main working theories.
...'

Neither police nor prosecutors formally alleged that scenario took place but the fact Mr Gellatly was tasked to examine items, including both mens’ cars, based on that scenario, suggests it is one of the main working theories.
...'

Presumably the theory is not one the Police came up with, rather it is the one presented to them by GL or his Lawyer. Police would have to investigate whether this scenario fits with the forensic evidence.

I'm thinking that even if the forensic scientist could not say exactly how they died, due to the condition of their remains and the lack of evidence present at the scene, what happened subsequently would tend to dispute any accidental or self defence story the accused might present.

 

[Lady O]

So what could be so "explosive"?

My interest has definitely spiked with comments like that

Oh no! Not explosives now......

 

[nut]

Only thing missing is a wood chipper

And snow

 

[Badd0g]

Yes, I question how familiar he was with the area, from his previous work there, if he had to ask Rob how to get somewhere? Doesn't really add up. But the fact that he was moving on makes the proposed argument with GL about a campsite less likely.

I don't question it. 4WDers often consult each other on routes - the conditions of the roads around there vary so much with use/weather etc that they are never the same from one trip to the next. Add the closures resulting from the bushfires, and I'd suggest RH was just getting a second opinion on his choice and perhaps utilising RAs ability to see the closures etc from his vantage point, on a PC.
Whatever the case, he had planned on heading that way, at some point.

 

[Kurve]

Here's a new take on the accidental shotgun death of Carol Clay theory Herald Sun this morning.
The best I've seen so far.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecr...y/news-story/534199a54ad5ec63d280f29929c9bd78

'Inside story of the missing campers mystery​

The alleged murder of secret lovers Russell Hill and Carol Clay has been shrouded in mystery – now the court case hinges on a series of key questions.

Miles Proust
January 21, 2023 - 7:00AM'

'....
On Tuesday, the first theory of what led to the couple’s deaths was raised by Mr Lynn’s lawyer Dermot Dann KC.

He asked Victoria Police Forensic expert Mark Gellatly about a scenario in which Ms Clay was accidentally shot while the other men struggled over a shotgun.

“The two were wrestling over the gun causing an accidental discharge … which struck Ms Clay in the head while positioned on the near side of Hill’s vehicle,” Mr Dann said.

Mr Gellatly replied it could not be ruled out.
“Yes,” he said.
“It’s a possible explanation at this point.”

In documents released to the media on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Gellatly said investigators provided him with information that Mr Lynn had confronted Mr Hill and Ms Clay because he was “annoyed” about a drone they were flying in the campsite where they were both staying.

In the scenario put to Mr Gellatly, Mr Hill then allegedly grabbed a shotgun from Mr Lynn’s car before a struggle ensued and it was accidentally discharged, striking Ms Clay in the head.

Mr Lynn then fatally stabbed Mr Hill during a fight, documents allege.

Neither police nor prosecutors formally alleged that scenario took place but the fact Mr Gellatly was tasked to examine items, including both mens’ cars, based on that scenario, suggests it is one of the main working theories.
...'

From the article. They don't know how Russell and Carol died, they only have Lynn's word for it and some stuff that might match up. If they hadn't found a piece of Carol's skull at the campsite and spatter they wouldn't know she was likely killed within their campsite.

The bullet lead they found at the campsite may or may not at this stage, have been matched to any of Lynn's guns.

Mr Hill’s remains were later identified through biological testing while Ms Clay was identified by jewellery and items left at the scene, according to investigators.

Forensic experts were unable to determine the precise causes of Mr Hill and Ms Clay’s deaths, but police allege bone fragments and a discharged bullet containing Ms Clay’s DNA were later found at the campsite.

 

[nut]

At the moment the real crime is covering up what had happened and trying to get away with what had happened, Not coming forward to claim self defence.

He was happy trying to conceal eveything, from burning evidence at the scene hiding the body’s, burning the body’s, painting his 4x4, selling his camper etc …

Can his actions after the incident be enough to get a murder conviction?

 

[Badd0g]

Neither police nor prosecutors formally alleged that scenario took place but the fact Mr Gellatly was tasked to examine items, including both mens’ cars, based on that scenario, suggests it is one of the main working theories.
...'

Presumably the theory is not one the Police came up with, rather it is the one presented to them by GL or his Lawyer. Police would have to investigate whether this scenario fits with the forensic evidence.

I'm thinking that even if the forensic scientist could not say exactly how they died, due to the condition of their remains and the lack of evidence present at the scene, what happened subsequently would tend to dispute any accidental or self defence story the accused might present.

The issue I have with this "working theory" of how things panned out, is that it does NOT fit with 2 counts of murder. I'd suggest that it was GL's story and the forensics team were tasked with determining if the defence could claim the evidence fit. Why would the prosecution introduce a scenario that cast reasonable doubt?

Oh and how is it that the vehicle was not damaged by the fire, yet the blood on the armrest was?
"Mr Gellatly had earlier told the court other suspected blood stains had been found on the vehicle’s armrest but they had been destroyed by a campsite fire..."

Good summation, but still poor reporting.

 

[BFew]

At the moment the real crime is covering up what had happened and trying to get away with what had happened, Not coming forward to claim self defence.

He was happy trying to conceal eveything, from burning evidence at the scene hiding the body’s, burning the body’s, painting his 4x4, selling his camper etc …

Can his actions after the incident be enough to get a murder conviction?

IMO, A judge only trial would probably have a fair chance of resulting in a circumstantial case for at least one murder convictions.
A trial by jury might prove to be much harder to get a murder conviction on the circumstantial and other evidence made public, so far in this case.

 

[Lady O]

The issue I have with this "working theory" of how things panned out, is that it does NOT fit with 2 counts of murder. I'd suggest that it was GL's story and the forensics team were tasked with determining if the defence could claim the evidence fit. Why would the prosecution introduce a scenario that cast reasonable doubt?

Oh and how is it that the vehicle was not damaged by the fire, yet the blood on the armrest was?
"Mr Gellatly had earlier told the court other suspected blood stains had been found on the vehicle’s armrest but they had been destroyed by a campsite fire..."

Good summation, but still poor reporting.

Yes, that was my point. It is NOT the Police theory, it is the DEFENCE theory. Something that would be tested if it goes to trial.