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.'

 

[independant witness]

No matter how hard I try, I just cannot believe Hill even got his hands on that gun. I find it extremely doubtful, preposterous even! Here are a few reasons why. If anyone cares I am a regular 4wder, camper, outdoors bloke who loves a beer around a campfire. I’ve hunted before using rifles although it’s not a big hobby of mine. I’ve been to Wonnangatta.

Here are just a few reasons why.


• it’s dark, and apparently he was in bed trying to have fun (Lynn’s version). Massive pain in the ass getting out of your tent at night.
• it’s a remote area, no one around.
• Hill is 73 and unarmed, Hill knows Lynn is younger, fitter and armed.
• Hill knows there is already animosity between the two blokes. They both would have been somewhat “on edge”
• Hill has a 74 yo lady friend in the tent (supposedly), why would he elevate the tension, risking armed confrontation while in the company of a lady? Big call.
• what was Hills plan once he got the gun? What was he thinking? It’s not as if Lynn’s a naughty 18 yo teenager about to get his gun confiscated.
• Hill may have been grumpy or whatever, but at his age I’d suggest he was well smart enough to not do something so stupid as to walk to another man’s camp/car, reach inside and take a gun!
• it’s just such a risky, reckless move considering Clay was with him. I just have trouble believing he would do that.


Ok, now I will accept/pretend that Hill made the outrageous (and unbelievable) move and went to Lynn’s camp to get the gun out of his car. The way Lynn describes these events are even MORE unbelievable.

• again its dark, apparently no lights inside Lynn’s car. Only campfire light?
• 73yo, in the dark, apparently finds the gun bag, unzips, finds magazine also?
• if Hill used a torch, surely Lynn would have seen him?
• Lynn would have been on edge, already animosity between parties. His ears and eyes would have been pricked so to speak. It’s not as if he would have been falling asleep singing Slim Dusty tunes loving life. He would have been on high alert.
• how on earth did Hill not only get the gun and mag, but make it back to Hills camp approx 40/50m away?
• literally EVERYONE camps right next to their car. Lynn would have been sitting no more than a few meters away from his car. How did Hill get the gun and get back to camp before a confrontation?
• considering the animosity already brewing, I’m expected to believe Lynn just left guns and ammo sitting on his car seat, at night with the car doors open? No way. I’d believe a younger, more reckless youth would possibly do that. But not a 57yo pilot who is already arguing with his camp neighbour.


In my opinion there is no way Hill would have got that gun, and made it back to camp before Lynn confronted him. If Hill did reach into the car, the confrontation over the gun would have taken place at or very near Lynn’s car. Lynn would have been sitting meters away and on alert. I’m also expected to believe 73yo Hill, in the middle of the night, managed to find the right gun with the right magazine, then he loaded the magazine, cycled the action etc? Hill had a torch you might say? Well how on earth didnt Lynn see him inside Lynn’s car with a torch?

So clearly put.....Prosecution repeating what you said almost verbatim.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

There's no way you'd be "having fun", knowing there's some lunatic nearby who you have argued with earlier, and there's a bit of thin vinyl between you and him. Nothing more off-putting

 

[Kurve]

Why there isn't live reports today on summing up is baffling. Here's what looks to be the first article which is basically a nothing burger.

“This case is about the alleged murders of Russell Hill and Carol Clay … and the deliberate, calculated and protracted series of actions taken by the accused to disguise his involvement,” he said.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/greg-lynn-trial-pilots-russell-hill-and-carol-clay-doublemurder-case-set-to-resume-for-closing-arguments/news-story/68c9c8495ef3204aa8c0a6d0fa5fe31e

 

[MrsBlueSky]

Have you spoken to anybody regarding their guy fell?
Was in that area last week and spoke to a lawyer in a lift briefly about nothing, was temper to ask him his feel the case.

I say ask away.
I was in a lift with lawyer Yovich and asked him why he was representing the Claremont serial killer and his reply was 'because someone has to do it'.
I personally think Yovich new his client was a killer and it was a fair enough answer, however I think some of these lawyers are so far up themselves that it could prompt any sort of reply. But you won't know unless you ask.

 

[MrsBlueSky]

Already a strong turn- out braving the cold. Legal arugements and debate on jury directions (Liberato, etc.) Will commence shortly, prior to the trial commencing again with the summation of Prs.
You can feel the anticipation just amongst the people waiting, the dama heightened in the esteemed environs of Vic's Supreme Court, #3.

You'll certainly be hearing the words beyond reasonable doubt a fair few times today.

 

[MrsBlueSky]

If I was on this jury then getting my head around the following which the judge will be trying to make clear this week would give me a migraine:

The Liberato direction serves to clarify and reinforce directions on the onus and standard of proof in a case in which there is a risk that the jury may be left with the impression that the evidence on which the accused relies will only give rise to a reasonable doubt if they believe it to be truthful, or that a preference for the evidence of the complainant suffices to establish guilt. Subject to statute, a Liberato direction should be given in a case in which the trial judge perceives that there is a real risk that the jury might view their role in this way.

 

[CredibleSauce]

Yes, it’s so telling that he made mention of them “in the tent having fun”

There’s really only one way GL would know that RH/CC were in the tent at that time - it is because GL waited until they were settled for the night then approached their campsite.

It explains why he knows they were in the tent “having fun” it also explains the pyjamas and bare feet.

iMO GL approached the campsite, and fired off the warning shots with the intention of continuing the conflict and retrieving the drone.

I do not for one minute believe that RH approached GL campsite and grabbed his shotgun; to me, that notion is preposterous.

If RH wanted to report GL, he already had the drone footage and it would make more sense that GL would be in possession of the shotgun when/if later visited by police.

Even if RH did retrieve the shotgun, there is no way he would be firing off shots, given his dislike of guns and awareness of gun safety, no way at all.

Especially if he did in fact intend on going to the police - imagine Russell rocking up at the station all “hey guys here’s a stolen firearm I’m illegally in possession of, just wanted to dob this bloke in for doing the wrong thing with guns. I probably don’t have a gun license cause I’m pretty anti gun and don’t own any myself but that’s fine right? Wait… no… what do you mean I’m under arrest for stealing, illegally storing and travelling with a firearm??”

Guess it’s hard to consider other people as more than idiots when you’re incredibly intelligent, handsome, and just so so superior to the general population like GL so clearly believes he is.

 

[Awakening]

He's not walking out of there.

I hope you are right, I’m now very nervous about the outcome.

Btw, I always picture you posting on your recliner with a laptop by a pool.

 

[GardenGnome]

Especially if he did in fact intend on going to the police - imagine Russell rocking up at the station all “hey guys here’s a stolen firearm I’m illegally in possession of, just wanted to dob this bloke in for doing the wrong thing with guns. I probably don’t have a gun license cause I’m pretty anti gun and don’t own any myself but that’s fine right? Wait… no… what do you mean I’m under arrest for stealing, illegally storing and travelling with a firearm??”

Guess it’s hard to consider other people as more than idiots when you’re incredibly intelligent, handsome, and just so so superior to the general population like GL so clearly believes he is.

Exactly! And if (according to the fantastical story provided) RH was so intent on getting that gun, he’s not going to go all cowboy and start shooting at the sky!!

He’s going to stealth away into the shadows, and - if he really was in the business of confiscating the shotgun - it doesn’t compute that he would simply leave the rifle just sitting there on its lonesome.

I believe that if he is a gruff and grumpy old man (as put forth by others) he would have his two cents worth, make his point then storm off (on his high horse) and attend to “business” at his own campsite!

 

[Run n Spread]

If I was on this jury then getting my head around the following which the judge will be trying to make clear this week would give me a migraine:

The Liberato direction serves to clarify and reinforce directions on the onus and standard of proof in a case in which there is a risk that the jury may be left with the impression that the evidence on which the accused relies will only give rise to a reasonable doubt if they believe it to be truthful, or that a preference for the evidence of the complainant suffices to establish guilt. Subject to statute, a Liberato direction should be given in a case in which the trial judge perceives that there is a real risk that the jury might view their role in this way.

My understanding is there are 2 parts in play.
1. The onus is on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. So in the case of the prosecution and defence telling to different stories it is not a matter of a Jury picking which one they prefer but rather the prosecution establishing theirs beyond doubt. (This was relevant in the Pell case as even thou the jury believed the complainant was being truthful the defence established reasonable doubt. So if you believe elements of this or it is accepted by the court you need to acquit)
2. The jury doesn't need to believe the defence. Only enough to create reasonable doubt. So even if you don't believe GLs whole story do you believe the key details enough that cast reasonable doubt on the prosecution case

 

[GladdyDee]

From The Age online now, this is the duck’s nuts of a summary of why this case is potentially cut and dry, IMO

 

[Lady O]

I hope you are right, I’m now very nervous about the outcome.

Btw, I always picture you posting on your recliner with a laptop by a pool.

Yep, in the recliner, but in his loungeroom, three ducks on the wall, flock wallpaper and telly on The Bold and the Beautiful!

 

[GardenGnome]

From The Age online now, this is the duck’s nuts of a summary of why this case is potentially cut and dry, IMO

From the Guardian:

Crown prosecutor Daniel Porceddu told the jury that the prosecution’s case was about the “deliberate” and “protected series of actions taken by the accused to disguise his involvement in and the manner of their deaths”

“The most extreme of those actions is the burning of the bodies,” he said.

Porceduu said Lynn’s actions after the alleged murder were designed to remove “forensic evidence which could reveal anything about the manner in which they died”.

“He knew he had murdered them and, if the scene had been left as it was, the forensic evidence would reveal that fact,” he said.

 

[InagoRaida]

Have you spoken to anybody regarding their git fell?
Was in that area last week and spoke to a lawyer in a lift briefly about nothing, was tempted to ask him his feel for the case.

Spoken to two...a long time mate(in his opinion, will be G on at least one count), and a rando barrister I met getting a coffee this morning. He also believe Prs. has made enough of a convincing case...he also had a fair idea that Mr Dann as counsel would set you back $18-20K / day for such a matter, plus support costs.....he is definitely earning his money..
BTW..very convincing, logical summation by Prs. this morning, with a number of rest breaks for the jury to take it all in, in a very eventful day thus far! A fainting public gallery member, and an errant mobile going off in the public gallery at a very poignant debate about Mr Dann's concerns that the Prs. Is flying very close to the sun regarding the rules (using Dunn& Brown as precedent).
We left for early lunch, with bombshell of Mr Dann taking some time to review the transcript, and intimating he make as a result of that review, make an application to discharge the jury..
This is the case that keeps giving..

 

[InagoRaida]

Why there isn't live reports today on summing up is baffling. Here's what looks to be the first article which is basically a nothing burger.

“This case is about the alleged murders of Russell Hill and Carol Clay … and the deliberate, calculated and protracted series of actions taken by the accused to disguise his involvement,” he said.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/greg-lynn-trial-pilots-russell-hill-and-carol-clay-doublemurder-case-set-to-resume-for-closing-arguments/news-story/68c9c8495ef3204aa8c0a6d0fa5fe31e

Not many journis in today...still enough that someone could make decent commentart..the is cetainly lots of feverishly pecking fingers down there!

 

[Lady O]

Spoken to two...a long time mate(in his opinion, will be G on at least one count), and a rando barrister I met getting a coffee this morning. He also believe Prs. has made enough of a convincing case...he also had a fair idea that Mr Dann as counsel would set you back $18-20K / day for such a matter, plus support costs.....he is definitely earning his money..
BTW..very convincing, logical summation by Prs. this morning, with a number of rest breaks for the jury to take it all in, in a very eventful day thus far! A fainting public gallery member, and an errant mobile going off in the public gallery at a very poignant debate about Mr Dann's concerns that the Prs. Is flying very close to the sun regarding the rules (using Dunn& Brown as precedent).
We left for early lunch, with bombshell of Mr Dann taking some time to review the transcript, and intimating he make as a result of that review, make an application to discharge the jury..
This is the case that keeps giving..

Win or lose, he still gets paid the same. No bonus for a win or discount for a loss.

 

[independant witness]

Spoken to two...a long time mate(in his opinion, will be G on at least one count), and a rando barrister I met getting a coffee this morning. He also believe Prs. has made enough of a convincing case...he also had a fair idea that Mr Dann as counsel would set you back $18-20K / day for such a matter, plus support costs.....he is definitely earning his money..
BTW..very convincing, logical summation by Prs. this morning, with a number of rest breaks for the jury to take it all in, in a very eventful day thus far! A fainting public gallery member, and an errant mobile going off in the public gallery at a very poignant debate about Mr Dann's concerns that the Prs. Is flying very close to the sun regarding the rules (using Dunn& Brown as precedent).
We left for early lunch, with bombshell of Mr Dann taking some time to review the transcript, and intimating he make as a result of that review, make an application to discharge the jury..
This is the case that keeps giving..

i agree the Prs. summary was convincing. However I found Dann interesting to watch too...looked very frustrated , or restless?? Ants in his pants... is he itching to to dispute the prosecution???

 

[InagoRaida]

Some of ny own personal obervations today...IMO, many in the gallery (except all on the RHS front-most pew!) share similar opinions and line of reasoning to the majority expressed on here..that is no surprise. We all share differences of experience, but converging to a similar conclusion.
Howver, i will say that Mrs.L has put on a uniquely special front on today. Waiting in line (after striding to the front), almost certainly deliberately in earshot of at leat 7-8 people, delivering some absolute woe-is-me tripe to her entorage...i could be mistaking some "gallows humour" on her part, but if i'm at least 2m aeay, it certainly isn't endearing her to other members of the gallery....

 

[independant witness]

Some of ny own personal obervations today...IMO, many in the gallery (except all on the RHS front-most pew!) share similar opinions and line of reasoning to the majority expressed on here..that is no surprise. We all share differences of experience, but converging to a similar conclusion.
Howver, i will say that Mrs.L has put on a uniquely special front on today. Waiting in line (after striding to the front), almost certainly deliberately in earshot of at leat 7-8 people, delivering some absolute woe-is-me tripe to her entorage...i could be mistaking some "gallows humour" on her part, but if i'm at least 2m aeay, it certainly isn't endearing her to other members of the gallery....

I think quite "telling" behaviour on her part.

 

[striker3]

From all intents, it seemed on Wed, the defence were perhaps running hard, maybe a bit on the backfoot, but the boldness of Lynn on the stand as sole witness has changed game significantly..its definitely put distance between the respective stories. It was a bold bold move, a friend in Law thought it may be a touch foolish..but in hindsight, with the tempered behaviour of both Mr & Mrs on his evidence day has proven to be a bold but prudent gamble, IMO.
Certainly he was a polished witness...sadly, slicker than some of the Crown witnesses/experts.
But is it enough? The jury only has to disbelieve a few holes in his story, and place weight in the incriminating conduct aspects, and he's done. I think that part will prove to be quite emotive to jurors, regardless of how it started.
Soon, we will know !

I respectfully disagree if the jury are to be given liberato directions.

Great information about it here: https://chrisnowlan.com/liberato.pdf

 

[Underarrest_]

There's no way you'd be "having fun", knowing there's some lunatic nearby who you have argued with earlier, and there's a bit of thin vinyl between you and him. Nothing more off-putting

Oh just clarifying, I meant not much sleep nor having fun (as in GL’s version.)

 

[Paul Kersey]

Wasn’t Lynn’s son who fainted was it?

 

[justallyone]

Spoken to two...a long time mate(in his opinion, will be G on at least one count), and a rando barrister I met getting a coffee this morning. He also believe Prs. has made enough of a convincing case...he also had a fair idea that Mr Dann as counsel would set you back $18-20K / day for such a matter, plus support costs.....he is definitely earning his money..
BTW..very convincing, logical summation by Prs. this morning, with a number of rest breaks for the jury to take it all in, in a very eventful day thus far! A fainting public gallery member, and an errant mobile going off in the public gallery at a very poignant debate about Mr Dann's concerns that the Prs. Is flying very close to the sun regarding the rules (using Dunn& Brown as precedent).
We left for early lunch, with bombshell of Mr Dann taking some time to review the transcript, and intimating he make as a result of that review, make an application to discharge the jury..
This is the case that keeps giving..

Crazy. I wonder if this was DD’s plan all along? GL will be wondering where all the $$ come from for another trial.

 

[InagoRaida]

i agree the Prs. summary was convincing. However I found Dann interesting to watch too...looked very frustrated , or restless?? Ants in his pants... is he itching to to dispute the prosecution???

His annunciation changes markedly when he has the proverbial "ants in pants"...and similarly, when he's on a roll, he rocks foward and back with conviction on the balls of his feet, a faux-conceited tone, and very deliberate cadence to reinforce his point. Quite the treat to eatch in play!
You in the gallery IW?

 

[Underarrest_]

Wasn’t Lynn’s son who fainted was it?

I’m not sure but it’s a tough gig for his sons.