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.'

 

[theouthouse]

If there was a guy line attached during the alleged altercation between the 2 males at the scene where one male and his female companion died, and the guy line was in place as the alleged perpetrator (as charged) stated there was one, but during the video filming of the scene that guy line was removed and then re-tied and the video or stills taken after the police arrived at the scene were then used in evidence - either in the brief supplied to defense or evidence at trial, that imo is altering evidence. Justice needs to be served correctly and without the ability to discover anomalies.

What would make it even more difficult, is the fact that the camera operator was wearing blue forensic gloves - as is evident when he lifts the porta-loo lid, just prior to moving out of the loo-tent and then onto filming the front of the vehicle, any subsequent handling of the guy rope may then have contaminated and evidence that may have been on the guy rope, including how the knot was tied, and how the rope was attached to the vehicle bullbar ie was the initial sling of the rope to fix it to the bullbar,over the bullbar or under the bullbar and was the manner of tieing the guy rope that which RH used.

It seems the alleged perpetrator stated there was a tie rope attached to the vehicle. Did he say to which corner of the vehicle the guy rope was attached to? Here is a link to media article that states what the prosecutor stated about the guy rope: article also includes photo of the guy rope as it was allegedly attached to the rear of the loo-tent and then to the vehicle bullbar. The guy rope knot appears to be quite loose.

Lynn’s account of campsite deaths is ‘complete fiction’, prosecutor tells jury

The lead prosecutor has urged a Supreme Court jury to reject Gregory Lynn’s version of events over the deaths of Russell Hill and Carol Clay at a campsite in 2020.

www.theage.com.au

Below is zoomed and cut from the above linked article.

View attachment 2017797

Not sure that I would have chosen to tie a guy rope to that particular section of the bullbar, something that wouldn't slip, say a vertical bar, would have been a bit more suitable but maybe the valley doesn't get drafty.

 

[Terrafirma]

resolution doesn't change the fact the guy tie is missing then it magically appears; and the fact that at the same time this is occurring on the video, the camera operator is walking to his left - without effort, past where the guy rope should have been tied to the bullbar.

Resolution wasn't the key point the mix of photos and who provided them is.

 

[GrayRanga]

a few more shots from the video featured in The Australian today

video times are in the shots below.

I certainly hope the camera operator or someone accompanying them did not remove the guy rope from the vehicle bull bar when videoing, then re-tie the guy rope and photos of the re-tied guy rope used in evidence. The camera operator does a complete walk around of the vehicle whilst capturing the footage. it would have been very difficult for the camera operator to get past the guy rope and there is no obvious bend-down to go under it and it would have been impossible to merely step over it. when he moves in front of the vehicle after capturing video of inside the toilet tent, he starts muttering something as if speaking with someone else present. I can't make out what he says.

Does this video have a time stamp on it?

How does this compare to the time stamps on the stills produced in evidence?

A Crime Scene photographer would have taken a group of photos taken initially with everything in situ (cover shots of the whole scene) and further shots taken as the police methodolically went through the car, (ie the hat on the dash and the hat was removed to get a clear shot of the sunglasses and, similarily the guy rope.)

The video may have been taken later.

Was this video entered into evidence?

If not, the Jury isn't basing any decision on the footage of this video and therefore can be ignored for the purposes of finding guilt or not

If the video was entered into evidence, it is the Defence's duty to query any inconsistancies in the photographic evidence and hold the Prosecution to account (they're being paid enough!)

I can't remember reading of the photographer being called to the stand to give evidence, so it is assumed that the contents of the photographic evidence (still photos) were not in dispute between the Prosecution and Defence

 

[nut]

It's impossible to prove or disprove an unwitnessed event. It doesn't mean the teller of the story should be believed. He's created a narrative that fits what can be seen - the burnt-out camp, the destroyed bodies, his vehicle on camera (thank God for that!) - and built a tale around it which is intended to mitigate his culpability as much as possible and shift as much blame as possible onto the victims.

I remember Ivan Milat saying he wasn't guilty because no one saw him murder anyone. It was the rest of the evidence that convicted him.

There is a Big difference in circumstances between a serial killer and a confrontation at a camp site.

 

[juggers]

there is no evidence he stepped under the guy rope.

Rewatch the video, the guy rope is there the whole time as below

 

[Percel]

Rewatch the video, the guy rope is there the whole time as belowView attachment 2017811

View attachment 2017812

Nice find, good thorough research

 

[Underarrest_]

You can support them without drawing attention to yourself unnecessarily, which some have observed has apparently happened.

That’s true, always better to be unpretentious and not draw attention in a court room, especially a trial as serious as this.

 

[Lady O]

If there was a guy line attached during the alleged altercation between the 2 males at the scene where one male and his female companion died, and the guy line was in place as the alleged perpetrator (as charged) stated there was one, but during the video filming of the scene that guy line was removed and then re-tied and the video or stills taken after the police arrived at the scene were then used in evidence - either in the brief supplied to defense or evidence at trial, that imo is altering evidence. Justice needs to be served correctly and without the ability to discover anomalies.

What would make it even more difficult, is the fact that the camera operator was wearing blue forensic gloves - as is evident when he lifts the porta-loo lid, just prior to moving out of the loo-tent and then onto filming the front of the vehicle, any subsequent handling of the guy rope may then have contaminated and evidence that may have been on the guy rope, including how the knot was tied, and how the rope was attached to the vehicle bullbar ie was the initial sling of the rope to fix it to the bullbar,over the bullbar or under the bullbar and was the manner of tieing the guy rope that which RH used.

It seems the alleged perpetrator stated there was a tie rope attached to the vehicle. Did he say to which corner of the vehicle the guy rope was attached to? Here is a link to media article that states what the prosecutor stated about the guy rope: article also includes photo of the guy rope as it was allegedly attached to the rear of the loo-tent and then to the vehicle bullbar. The guy rope knot appears to be quite loose.

Lynn’s account of campsite deaths is ‘complete fiction’, prosecutor tells jury

The lead prosecutor has urged a Supreme Court jury to reject Gregory Lynn’s version of events over the deaths of Russell Hill and Carol Clay at a campsite in 2020.

www.theage.com.au

Below is zoomed and cut from the above linked article.

View attachment 2017797

And note how the person doing the video had to duck under the rope coming from the passenger side to the driver's side.

 

[Terrafirma]

Rewatch the video, the guy rope is there the whole time as belowView attachment 2017811

View attachment 2017812

So the wild goose chase revealed the rope was there the whole time.! LOL

 

[champagnegirl]

I think uneducated simply means that the person didn’t go to a tertiary institution.

Hill was a forestry worker,using heavy machinery to clear trails, to create accessible tracks through heavily timbered country etc and no doubt was a smart hard working operator. He needed a good brain in his head to carry out the physical side of his work, as well as the ability to make good decisions etc doing essential work to clear bush and make these wonderful places accessible so that the public could access for recreational purposes.

This would have been hard yakka and required intelligence, strength and perseverance in extreme weather conditions many of us would never work in. He must have been a very tough man. I think in later years he worked for Bunnings as a truck driver transporting timber.

Just looking at his face told a story. It was a strong kind face. And well educated in life’s university. The fact he was driving the rig he drove, frequently visiting the high country, at mid seventies said a lot about his physical strength and his intelligence. I’m just sorry he didn’t get to live out his life.

Oh dear that reads not quite as I wanted it to read. I didn’t mean anyone is “uneducated” just because they haven’t gone through Tertiary Education. My apologies. I would never think that. Not at all. We are all educated somewhere, at one level or another, some a bit more, some less.

Some of the most intelligent and salt of the earth type people I have known were never compatible with Schools and ended up leaving school at 13/14 but made a great success of their lives.

The School of Life is perhaps one of the best learning centres.

 

[Underarrest_]

Oh dear that reads not quite as I wanted it to read. I didn’t mean anyone is “uneducated” just because they haven’t gone through Tertiary Education. My apologies. I would never think that. Not at all. We are all educated somewhere, at one level or another, some a bit more, some less.

Some of the most intelligent and salt of the earth type people I have known were never compatible with Schools and ended up leaving school at 13/14 but made a great success of their lives.

The School of Life is perhaps one of the best learning centres.

I didn’t read your post to mean anything bad.
I meant to comment before about your words,
‘Life’s university.’
Beautiful words and so true. Life experiences are our greatest learnings.

 

[Terrafirma]

I think it's almost certain there will be an appeal after the jury deliver it's verdict. If the case goes against Lynn then an appeal is almost definite. Conversely the prosecution will appeal if Lynn get's off to a point they think is inappropriate. Which one have you all got.?

 

[champagnegirl]

I didn’t read your post to mean anything bad.
I meant to comment before about your words,
‘Life’s university.’
Beautiful words and so true. Life experiences are our greatest learnings.

Thank you. Much appreciated.

 

[Zidane98]

I think it's almost certain there will be an appeal after the jury deliver it's verdict. If the case goes against Lynn then an appeal is almost definite. Conversely the prosecution will appeal if Lynn get's off to a point they think is inappropriate. Which one have you all got.?

My money is on a manslaughter for CC. Prosecutions case for RH death is lacking, not sure there will be a conviction for that one.

 

[LeChatNoir]

‘Complete factual vacuum’: Scathing closing arguments in alleged camper killer trial

Defence lawyers for the man accused of murdering two campers in Victoria's High Country have attempted to tear apart the prosecution's case, arguing the retirees' deaths were tragic accidents.

www.abc.net.au

Dermott Dan ""How can you find someone guilty in a complete factual vacuum?". Wow, I can't believe he said this, considering it is his client who is responsible for destroying the evidence that left the factual vacuum including the bodies of Hill & Clay

 

[Terrafirma]

‘Complete factual vacuum’: Scathing closing arguments in alleged camper killer trial

Defence lawyers for the man accused of murdering two campers in Victoria's High Country have attempted to tear apart the prosecution's case, arguing the retirees' deaths were tragic accidents.

www.abc.net.au

Dermott Dan ""How can you find someone guilty in a complete factual vacuum?". Wow, I can't believe he said this, considering it is his client who is responsible for destroying the evidence that left the factual vacuum including the bodies of Hill & Clay

100% it was my reaction too. Could you imagine Dan as the lead Prosecutor? It would be quite entertaining. I haven't seen the Pro and the Defense in action personally but it seems they have 2 x different styles. Dan says "Where's the Fantasy" and only has to look at his client's version of events.

 

[LeChatNoir]

100% it was my reaction too. Could you imagine Dan as the lead Prosecutor? It would be quite entertaining. I haven't seen the Pro and the Defense in action personally but it seems they have 2 x different styles. Dan says "Where's the Fantasy" and only has to look at his client's version of events.

I hope the jury see the same thing you see Terrafirma.

I'm also appalled that DD is still referring to Ms Clay as "Mr Hill's childhood sweetheart and romantic companion" as if she has no identity of her own other than being Hill's lover!

 

[jason_recliner]

‘Complete factual vacuum’: Scathing closing arguments in alleged camper killer trial

Defence lawyers for the man accused of murdering two campers in Victoria's High Country have attempted to tear apart the prosecution's case, arguing the retirees' deaths were tragic accidents.

www.abc.net.au

Dermott Dan ""How can you find someone guilty in a complete factual vacuum?". Wow, I can't believe he said this, considering it is his client who is responsible for destroying the evidence that left the factual vacuum including the bodies of Hill & Clay

Except it's not a factual vacuum - they are just words. There are many proven facts and they all support Lynns stories being unreasonable, unbelievable, and made up.

 

[Spectrix]

My money is on a manslaughter for CC. Prosecutions case for RH death is lacking, not sure there will be a conviction for that one.

I share this belief.
We suspect that GL's story is completely fictional.
We know that the prosecution's story is also fictional.

GL is clearly guilty of something. But no one seems to be sure what that something is, exactly.
I feel for the jury in this case.

 

[Sir_Loin]

‘Complete factual vacuum’: Scathing closing arguments in alleged camper killer trial

Defence lawyers for the man accused of murdering two campers in Victoria's High Country have attempted to tear apart the prosecution's case, arguing the retirees' deaths were tragic accidents.

www.abc.net.au

Dermott Dan ""How can you find someone guilty in a complete factual vacuum?". Wow, I can't believe he said this, considering it is his client who is responsible for destroying the evidence that left the factual vacuum including the bodies of Hill & Clay

I wonder if the prosecution has messed up here. Was the guy line brought in as evidence at any point prior to their closing argument? I don’t remember reading anything about it prior.

 

[Underarrest_]

I wonder if the prosecution has messed up here. Was the guy line brought in as evidence at any point prior to their closing argument? I don’t remember reading anything about it prior.

GL was cross examined about the guy rope. GL first said he didn’t see it, and then said, I must have gone under it, it didn’t get in the way.

 

[Zidane98]

I wonder if the prosecution has messed up here. Was the guy line brought in as evidence at any point prior to their closing argument? I don’t remember reading anything about it prior.

For me their lack of explanation how & why RH was murdered is a big mistake on their part.

If they convince the jury of this then it becomes more logical that GL ended CC as a witness to his crime.

From the evidence available IMO CC's death is more likely to have occured before RH was killed then after.

 

[MiguelM]

I think it's almost certain there will be an appeal after the jury deliver it's verdict. If the case goes against Lynn then an appeal is almost definite. Conversely the prosecution will appeal if Lynn get's off to a point they think is inappropriate. Which one have you all got.?

If it is manslaughter he may not have grounds. Who is paying for his defence?

 

[theouthouse]

100% it was my reaction too. Could you imagine Dan as the lead Prosecutor? It would be quite entertaining. I haven't seen the Pro and the Defense in action personally but it seems they have 2 x different styles. Dan says "Where's the Fantasy" and only has to look at his client's version of events.

I'm a little surprised the defense didn't play more into the emotional and thought process training pilots go through in explaining away GLs strange and very self serving post event actions, I would have thought it may cast some doubt into a murder verdict. IMO.

 

[Percel]

So the wild goose chase revealed the rope was there the whole time.! LOL

At least they’re consistent