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.'

 

[Sir_Loin]

This is suppression though, not exclusion. The prosecution didn't contest this suppression order and its reported thst it was suoressed for prejucial reasons. Which to me suggests they needed to preserve his admission of his actions until the jury was empanelled. If it had been released, there is no way rgey would have gotten a jury that was impartial.

There may be process errors with other evidence but it doesn't appear this is related.

Apart from the police officer who recorded the interaction with Lynn without his consent. That’s tossed I’d imagine which is more to the point I’m making. The suppression thing was consented to by the crown. Probably a good move if some of the reported prior police work is anything to go by.

 

[fargo in dargo]

im going to throw this one out there, from Psychology Today...

"Organized killers are very difficult to apprehend because they go to inordinate lengths to cover their tracks and often are forensically savvy, meaning they are familiar with police investigation methods."

Lynn coughed up the PRECISE location of the remains to the police, as others have sugessted already, perhaps to steer the police AWAY from other sites? Just a perhaps guys.

What if Russell was flying his drone with its 15km range, and flew over Lynn mucking about at one of these sites. Russell is actually filming the sunset or whatever, BUT Lynn on the ground sees or hears the drone, and THINKS or BELIEVES he has been filmed by the drone in a compromised situation.

Lynn makes his way back to camp, maybe there is a confrontation, maybe there isnt, certainly NOT like Lynns story at least, and he murders the pair? Then proceeds to go to "inordinate lengths to cover his tracks".

I throw this out here as an idea, solely based on the fact that world wide, as i have read and studied, serial killers have a common trait of going to extraordinary lengths of covering up their crimes, so that they can do them again.

There are several missing people in the area in the last decade right?

Just drawing some loose threads together guys. Perhaps im off the reservation with this?

 

[Sir_Loin]

im going to throw this one out there, from Psychology Today...

"Organized killers are very difficult to apprehend because they go to inordinate lengths to cover their tracks and often are forensically savvy, meaning they are familiar with police investigation methods."

Lynn coughed up the PRECISE location of the remains to the police, as others have sugessted already, perhaps to steer the police AWAY from other sites? Just a perhaps guys.

What if Russell was flying his drone with its 15km range, and flew over Lynn mucking about at one of these sites. Russell is actually filming the sunset or whatever, BUT Lynn on the ground sees or hears the drone, and THINKS or BELIEVES he has been filmed by the drone in a compromised situation.

Lynn makes his way back to camp, maybe there is a confrontation, maybe there isnt, certainly NOT like Lynns story at least, and he murders the pair? Then proceeds to go to "inordinate lengths to cover his tracks".

I throw this out here as an idea, solely based on the fact that world wide, as i have read and studied, serial killers have a common trait of going to extraordinary lengths of covering up their crimes, so that they can do them again.

There are several missing people in the area in the last decade right?

Just drawing some loose threads together guys. Perhaps im off the reservation with this?

No evidence for this in the public domain at all. I’m sure if you went through DSM 5 you could pick out any check list that fits.

 

[revo333]

It is so good to hear that and have your reports from the court confirming things for us here and pointing out a different bits to draw our attention to. Thank you.

The podcast is good as well for some information that I've never read in any of the daily updates about the trial.

For instance someone pages ago questioned the persons evidence who was camping near when Lynn made the 3 point turn but the latest Podcast episode clarified both sides have acknowledged it was Lynn.

 

[Percel]

The podcast is good as well for some information that I've never read in any of the daily updates about the trial.

For instance someone pages ago questioned the persons evidence who was camping near when Lynn made the 3 point turn but the latest Podcast episode clarified both sides have acknowledged it was Lynn.

Which one is that Revo?

 

[theyearwas1969]

Which one is that Revo?

It is called “The Missing Campers Podcast”

 

[Percel]

It is called “The Missing Campers Podcast”

Magic, ta

 

[LeChatNoir]

Fascinating case that’ll end up on Netflix one day I’d imagine.

Story feels hard to believe but possible. I find it hard to believe someone would steal a gun from a hunter instead of just leaving if you felt threatened. With basically no evidence of the struggle could it come down to “reasonable doubt” and a hung jury?

Do we know the demographic of the jury?

 

[Kurve]

This is what I’m referencing.

Court grants suppression order for evidence in accused Victoria campsite killer case | Victoria | The Guardian

Ruling prevents publication of material from covert recording of Greg Lynn taken by police in July 2020, a statement, and interview in November

amp.theguardian.com

Probably no further reporting at this stage given suppression orders but the police have made mistakes in terms of recording evidence.

We won’t know what’s in/out until after the trial I guess. But how many f/ups have they made.

As an aside: Gary Jubelin a decorated NSW senior detective did the same thing. Was charged and convicted of a criminal offence. Go figure.

The article states the July 2020 covert recordings were suppressed, with others. July 2020 was when the police made first contact and knocked on Lynn's door.

Yes, you're right. Jubelin was convicted for covertly recording a POI through the William Tyrrell investigation, if I've felt that was simply what the brass used to take him down. There's more to that story.

Edit:

Det Sen Con Abbey Justin, who, along with her colleague, was the first police member to speak with Lynn about the campers, gave evidence she recorded Lynn without his knowledge in July 2020.

 

[Brian Oblivion]

Do we know the demographic of the jury?

There are 14 of them left. All are human beings. Some are female and some are male. One female juror
was excused due to illness.

 

[Kurve]

This article provided by SirLoin which we must have missed prior, raises the question of where the shot was taken from.

Leading Sen Con Paul Griffiths tested whether it was possible that if two men wrestled at the bonnet of a Toyota Landcruiser for control of a shotgun, and the muzzle of the weapon was pointed towards the rear, that it could accidentally discharge, firing a shot through the passenger side rear mirror, and striking a person in the head who was positioned near the rear passenger side wheel of the vehicle.
He tested whether the person who was shot could be standing, crouching, or stooping, finding the scenarios ranged from plausible to highly unlikely.

Court grants suppression order for evidence in accused Victoria campsite killer case | Victoria | The Guardian

Ruling prevents publication of material from covert recording of Greg Lynn taken by police in July 2020, a statement, and interview in November

amp.theguardian.com

 

[MiguelM]

The article states the July 2020 covert recordings were suppressed, with others. July 2020 was when the police made first contact and knocked on Lynn's door.

Yes, you're right. Jubelin was convicted for covertly recording a POI through the William Tyrrell investigation, if I've felt that was simply what the brass used to take him down. There's more to that story.

Edit:

Det Sen Con Abbey Justin, who, along with her colleague, was the first police member to speak with Lynn about the campers, gave evidence she recorded Lynn without his knowledge in July 2020.

So did police stuff up by not telling him anything said could be used as evidence?

 

[LeChatNoir]

No evidence for this in the public domain at all. I’m sure if you went through DSM 5 you could pick out any check list that fits.

If the shoe fits! And IMO the shoe fits like it was custom made!

im going to throw this one out there, from Psychology Today...

"Organized killers are very difficult to apprehend because they go to inordinate lengths to cover their tracks and often are forensically savvy, meaning they are familiar with police investigation methods."

Lynn coughed up the PRECISE location of the remains to the police, as others have sugessted already, perhaps to steer the police AWAY from other sites? Just a perhaps guys.

What if Russell was flying his drone with its 15km range, and flew over Lynn mucking about at one of these sites. Russell is actually filming the sunset or whatever, BUT Lynn on the ground sees or hears the drone, and THINKS or BELIEVES he has been filmed by the drone in a compromised situation.

Lynn makes his way back to camp, maybe there is a confrontation, maybe there isnt, certainly NOT like Lynns story at least, and he murders the pair? Then proceeds to go to "inordinate lengths to cover his tracks".

I throw this out here as an idea, solely based on the fact that world wide, as i have read and studied, serial killers have a common trait of going to extraordinary lengths of covering up their crimes, so that they can do them again.

There are several missing people in the area in the last decade right?

Just drawing some loose threads together guys. Perhaps im off the reservation with this?

I've been entertaining this line of thought for some time. IMO it is a real possibility. As pointed out, this category of people have a high IQ, and are very good at covering their tracks. They don't get caught because they are clumsy, stupid or panic. That is why they are so hard to catch.. they don't leave many breadcrumbs behind. In most cases they get caught because of luck. He didn't know the Mytreford gate was closed forcing him to go via Hotham, and maybe Russell did have a 3rd phone that Lynn wasn't aware of. Phone pings, cameras take photos..... Police are now paying attention!

All speculation but what if he has done this before and had gone to visit the site where his buried a body, and Russell's drone was flying at the time? That is as good a reason to kill the couple as any reason I've heard so far, IMO.

What if he gave up the couple's burial site because he didn't want police looking and finding more bodies he had buried, sounds crazy when I say it in the light of day, but not so crazy in the still of the night. It is as good a theory as any that has been put forward so far. IMO

 

[Zidane98]

im going to throw this one out there, from Psychology Today...

"Organized killers are very difficult to apprehend because they go to inordinate lengths to cover their tracks and often are forensically savvy, meaning they are familiar with police investigation methods."

Lynn coughed up the PRECISE location of the remains to the police, as others have sugessted already, perhaps to steer the police AWAY from other sites? Just a perhaps guys.

What if Russell was flying his drone with its 15km range, and flew over Lynn mucking about at one of these sites. Russell is actually filming the sunset or whatever, BUT Lynn on the ground sees or hears the drone, and THINKS or BELIEVES he has been filmed by the drone in a compromised situation.

Lynn makes his way back to camp, maybe there is a confrontation, maybe there isnt, certainly NOT like Lynns story at least, and he murders the pair? Then proceeds to go to "inordinate lengths to cover his tracks".

I throw this out here as an idea, solely based on the fact that world wide, as i have read and studied, serial killers have a common trait of going to extraordinary lengths of covering up their crimes, so that they can do them again.

There are several missing people in the area in the last decade right?

Just drawing some loose threads together guys. Perhaps im off the reservation with this?

Some pretty obvious problems with this


1. If there was such a site it would have been discovered with the numerous thorough searches of the Wonnangatta Valley.


2. We can't say certainly about anything here. GL is not a serial killer, if he were the prosecution would absolutely be using this in their evidence.


3. Giving up the remains of RH/CC has absolutely zero relation to police looking into other cases. Infact it does the opposite, the police would now double their efforts to find extra stuff against him to secure a conviction if they believe in his guilt or even had a remote suspicion of a link to other cases.


4. Nothing inordain at all about GL's actions post deaths. Clumsily tried to exit via a closed gate in the middle of the night creating a huge racket, spent 4 hours driving before burying the bodies of RH/CC in a random place not far off the side of a 4wd track. Then proceeded to get himself snapped on camera while he has RH's phone in his possession. This is the behavior of an individual acting irrationally without forethought.


I think you'll find this theory has little to no merit.

 

[Kurve]

So did police stuff up by not telling him anything said could be used as evidence?

To use covert recordings in evidence, I'm pretty sure you need to have secured a warrant or you need to ask permission. You can't sneaky use your phone to do it.

I don't think anybody really cares through a double or child murder investigation but those 'illegal' covert recordings shouldn't surface.

 

[Zidane98]

To use covert recordings in evidence, I'm pretty sure you need to have secured a warrant or you need to ask permission. You can't sneaky use your phone to do it.

I don't think anybody really cares through a double or child murder investigation but those 'illegal' covert recordings shouldn't surface.

Yes, absolutely correct. Also against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party unless as you say there is a warrant.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

He told others he used a lump of metal to get it high in the trees.

The people who removed our palm trees used a small weight thing that carried a line high up to the top of the tree in order to guide it down the right way when it was cut. Probably the same thing.

 

[MiguelM]

Yes, absolutely correct. Also against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party unless as you say there is a warrant.

Don't they do this to monitor suspected terrorist activity? Military are allowed to yeah?

 

[MrsBlueSky]

They can but only if it's relevant.

Yes I know I don’t need you to step out law 101 every time to me. You are missing the the point I’m making.

By your own accounting the police spent months amassing evidence to finally nail this guy they’ve been surveilling for a stonewall conviction.
Only to get to a second week of trial and we’re hearing about RH’s Willy, his drone and his truck.

There are clearly evidentiary issues with this proceeding given the progress to date. That’s my point.

I take your point and completely agree with you.
I'm expecting the prosecution will start their vilification of CC very soon.

 

[Lady O]

Yes, absolutely correct. Also against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party unless as you say there is a warrant.

Police are permitted to keep a written record of conversations with witnesses/suspects, so it's not a great stretch to think they might record with their phone to later transcribe. I'd even suggest that it is likely to be more accurate and if the person denies saying something, then they have a recording to back it up. Maybe it's a law that needs changing for Police.

 

[LeChatNoir]

There are 14 of them left. All are human beings. Some are female and some are male. One female juror
was excused due to illness.

lol. I'm asking what is their demographic? Young, old, etc?

 

[Kurve]

Theory:

I don't think Lynn shot at or near the drone now because he'd know before taking that shot, there would be a recording of him doing it.

He was shooting at night IMO, at them and close enough they know it. He's doing it to scare them out of there. Hill has already told him a family member was killed in a deer hunting accident.

Lynn thinks he can get away with this because there are no witnesses, he may have even put one through the tent.

Carol's cracked it and started packing her stuff up and Hill's really mad, he's taken two viagra and the party's over, Lynn's ruined his night.

 

[Lady O]

He told others he used a lump of metal to get it high in the trees.

Ok, that makes sense. In the photo below, you can see that the height of the aerial would not interfere with vehicles driving past.



What it would do though, is make it unlikely that Hill would have moved his Toyota unless he was packing up to leave, as he would have had to remove the aerial.

 

[LeChatNoir]

Yes, absolutely correct. Also against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party unless as you say there is a warrant.

It is not against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party. I recently had a situation where I had to do this and I told the police. They told me that as long as one member of the party being recorded had consented to the recording it was not illegal. This was between me and a second party... I was the consenting member. Recording is not illegal. What might be illegal is using it as evidence or publishing it.

 

[jason_recliner]

... against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party unless as you say there is a warrant.

It's more complex and nuanced than this.