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.'

 

[Terrafirma]

I think we need to remember, the prosecution is not intending to prove a motive or even how Russell was killed ....

The prosecution are trying to prove that two people were killed intentionally.

If you can't reason that GL has told the truth about about how the two deaths happened.... then the only option is, is that he did lie about how the two deaths happened...

Quite simply his story doesn't mathematically add up. I think Jason Recliner put it at about 1 in 140,000. For me, its higher than that and we're still only talking about how Carol died.

All we've heard so far is everything Lynn has put forward is plausible. So not sure what you mean by mathematically adding up? Yes the odds of Clay being killed accidentally are long but do they have to add up if the prosecution can't disprove them? Just trying to be a juror for a moment.

 

[Dirh Semaj]

All we've heard so far is everything Lynn has put forward is plausible. So not sure what you mean by mathematically adding up? Yes the odds of Clay being killed accidentally are long but do they have to add up if the prosecution can't disprove them? Just trying to be a juror for a moment.

Great question Terrafirma!

JMO
In a sense, the prosecution won't need to disprove Lynn's story.

...think logically...

The prosecution's job is to prove guilt of a charge.
The jury need to be 'beyond reasonable doubt' of that charge.

Is Lynn's story plausible? Hmmm. I'll let you stew on that.
Is it possible, of course..nothing's impossible.

The prosecution don't need to disprove nonsense!

The prosecution can absolutely say that a story is a lie....supported by this, this and this.

Its the prosecution's job to prove guilt...
It's not the defence's job to show innocence...he's already innocent....until proven guilty.

 

[GrayRanga]

All we've heard so far is everything Lynn has put forward is plausible. So not sure what you mean by mathematically adding up? Yes the odds of Clay being killed accidentally are long but do they have to add up if the prosecution can't disprove them? Just trying to be a juror for a moment.

The one thing I find puts a major hole in Lynn's story that has been reported so far is that the time frames are for his puported activities are not plausable on a dark moonless night after seeing two people die by "accident" in front of him.

Bit of a broken record for me

His subsequent actions are hightly problematic too if done all under the the light of a head lamp over ground he doesn't know

Destroy, or at least damage, the time frame in the Jury's collective mind, and it opens up doubts of the verisimilitude of his entire story of the events of that night.

Open other doubts in the collective mind, such as removing the bodies and burning the camp site may not be considered as unfortunate decisions, but the actions of a man who is guilty of, and hiding of, cold blooded murders.

I think the ROI of what he did over subsequent months will be entered into evidence, as the pathologist gave evidence for insect carapaces found on the burnt fragmented bones

The defence, surely and correctly. make great importance of "reasonable doubt" as to the importance of evidence presented to the charges.

"Reasonable doubt" also applies in the Jury's belief or opinion of his evidence given in the ROI

 

[Royces Hart]

The one thing I find puts a major hole in Lynn's story that has been reported so far is that the time frames are for his puported activities are not plausable on a dark moonless night after seeing two people die by "accident" in front of him.

Bit of a broken record for me

His subsequent actions are hightly problematic too if done all under the the light of a head lamp over ground he doesn't know

Destroy, or at least damage, the time frame in the Jury's collective mind, and it opens up doubts of the verisimilitude of his entire story of the events of that night.

Open other doubts in the collective mind, such as removing the bodies and burning the camp site may not be considered as unfortunate decisions, but the actions of a man who is guilty of, and hiding of, cold blooded murders.

I think the ROI of what he did over subsequent months will be entered into evidence, as the pathologist gave evidence for insect carapaces found on the burnt fragmented bones

The defence, surely and correctly. make great importance of "reasonable doubt" as to the importance of evidence presented to the charges.

"Reasonable doubt" also applies in the Jury's belief or opinion of his evidence given in the ROI

I don’t disagree with you. The only thing I can’t understand, is why would GL lie about the timeframe? What is there to gain or hide, by shifting the events a couple of hours later?

 

[GrayRanga]

I don’t disagree with you. The only thing I can’t understand, is why would GL lie about the timeframe? What is there to gain or hide, by shifting the events a couple of hours later?

Not supported by any evidence presented so far, my own opinion is that the altercation would have occured about 18:30 after the radio sked was finished to 19:30, whilst still light.

Even accidently killing 2 people would shock most people into inaction for a while, so give him a bit of time to think of options

First option would be pack up his camp and go straight away, second option is to stage a robbery, drone and money and go but leaving the bodies there, third option is to add a bit of evidence to a robbery by firing a shot or three into the air (which left a time point for anybody who might have heard it), after no one investgates, the 4th option is to pretend he wasn't there and by removing their bodies the police will be at a dead end

The moment he pulled the triggers, he was locked into a time frame, because he didn't know who may have heard them

It was only later and his story commited to the time frame that he learnt that no one heard them

 

[revo333]

This informant I've read is the last witness for the prosecution, I hope he's got all his ducks in a row because I haven't seen anything yet that looks like convictions for murder.

No pressure at all

 

[revo333]

I think there are a lot of people on here who think he's guilty, but don't think the prosecution have proven their case.
I guess we have to remember that we are experiencing the trial through the lens of the media, and I think that might be a bit different to what the jury sees.
IMO

I think some of us were waiting and maybe hoping for that 'Gotcha' moment that would back Lynn right into a corner but it looks like it's not going to come.

 

[10571z]

I love GL lawyer trying to blemish experts when the entire reason they are struggling to find info is due to his client torching everything

 

[revo333]

I love GL lawyer trying to blemish experts when the entire reason they are struggling to find info is due to his client torching everything

Good point.

 

[Run n Spread]

I love GL lawyer trying to blemish experts when the entire reason they are struggling to find info is due to his client torching everything

Could he be acquitted and walk?
Any time related to interference of a corpse would be time served given he has done 2.5 years and counting.
While no legal definition exists for beyond reasonable doubt best explanation is all other reasonable possibilities can be excluded.
Now the only other reasonable possibility we've been given instead of a headshot and moving bodies = murder is GLs explanation.
IMO it is far fetched so he will need to sell it. Or does the defence think they've enough to wear manslaughter.
That's the Max so GL testifies for an all or nothing shot

 

[jason_recliner]

I don’t disagree with you. The only thing I can’t understand, is why would GL lie about the timeframe? What is there to gain or hide, by shifting the events a couple of hours later?

It's a good question and it's possible that it did happen over his claimed timeframe, but it's also possible things happened nothing like he is claiming, it's all a big self-serving lie, and he had much more time to think, plan, and cover up his murders. And, by implication, much more time to consider doing the right thing and reporting two deaths.

 

[ApplesandBananas]

Thanks for all the contributions on this thread, I've been following it for a few years now. What I am curious about (and not sure how relevant it is for the jury) is why the police went to get him, when they did. What was the trigger? It has been posited that it was on mental health grounds, has that been confirmed? From what I can tell, GL has done a magnificent job of destroying/interfering with the remains, so why on this specific occasion did they act? I'd suggest it wasn't on Mental Health grounds. Any thoughts? And will it come out in the trial?

 

[Eaglette01]

Thanks for all the contributions on this thread, I've been following it for a few years now. What I am curious about (and not sure how relevant it is for the jury) is why the police went to get him, when they did. What was the trigger? It has been posited that it was on mental health grounds, has that been confirmed? From what I can tell, GL has done a magnificent job of destroying/interfering with the remains, so why on this specific occasion did they act? I'd suggest it wasn't on Mental Health grounds. Any thoughts? And will it come out in the trial?

Police had been listening into all GL conversations.

The bloke GL liked talking to himself and had said a Goodbye to his wife and boys. Taken a bottle of whiskey and made another impromptu drive up to the HC.

The "listener" said his talking to himself sounded "off" and the listener deemed (after listenting to over 3000+ conversations)..... that GL was about to take his own life. Media have reported on this.

If anyone listened to me in the Car all they'd hear is:
Toot toot !!
Fu**k Off - you idiot !
Oh YOU moron !
Indicate you tosser !
WTAF !
+ constant sing a longs to my selection of music on CDs ! "Wake me up before you go go"
Toot toot toot !!! lol

 

[FrankGrimes]

Well, on Monday the informant hits the witness box,

This is where the case actually starts; up to now it has been Act 1, the witnesses have given an outline of the physical setting, some independent witness testimony of time frames and or course the ballistic and pathology evidence.

The background has been set and Act 2 starts. The jury will see parts of the ROI, probably see footage Lynn's demeanour and his response to the questions and some of the questions asked.

The prosecution with be able to probe the ROI and the informant's opinions.and the facts they utilised to provide them the basis to charge Lynn with two counts of murder. They will be creating the narrative where those charges are the reasonable outcome of events that only the sole survivor of the incident, Lynn, witnessed

Of course, the defence will attempt to raise questions in the Jury's mind to satisfy a reasonable doubt of every element

It becomes suddenly more interesting, almost like a game of chess played with words

And no, there isn't going to be any sudden theatrical declaration from either barrister which suddenly resolves the case. seeing Lynn walk out a free man or get slotted to 2 days before Judgement Day

Well summed up, defence did their job and tried to pick holes in prosecution, which happens in every trail. His interview will be interesting.

 

[FrankGrimes]

All we've heard so far is everything Lynn has put forward is plausible. So not sure what you mean by mathematically adding up? Yes the odds of Clay being killed accidentally are long but do they have to add up if the prosecution can't disprove them? Just trying to be a juror for a moment.

you think his story is plausible?
It’s the only story he can come up, it’s total bs.

 

[Kurve]

you think his story is plausible?
It’s the only story he can come up, it’s total bs.

Well for making up a story tbh, he could have done better. It's very complex with a lot of moving parts that he needs to make fit with him as the victim acting in self defence.

It wasn't really necessary to introduce the knife and make it even more fantastical. All he had to do was create a scenario where 74yo Hill bled and died.

Edit: This is in part why I think a knife was involved but he's simply changed a couple of elements, he's made Hill die by his own knife when it was Lynn's knife, he's made Hill die last when he was the first to die and he probably didn't die straight away. He lived long enough to yell out to Clay which has triggered Lynn in to immediate elsewhere action and the cover up.

 

[jason_recliner]

First option would be pack up his camp and go straight away, second option is to stage a robbery, drone and money and go but leaving the bodies there, third option is to add a bit of evidence to a robbery by firing a shot or three into the air (which left a time point for anybody who might have heard it), after no one investgates, the 4th option is to pretend he wasn't there and by removing their bodies the police will be at a dead end

The moment he pulled the triggers, he was locked into a time frame, because he didn't know who may have heard them

It was only later and his story commited to the time frame that he learnt that no one heard them

Except the shots were almost certainly fired in reasonably quick succession (this part of the story is likely true, as that's what he thought may have been heard and so had to make up BS about firing into the sky), and at least one of them killed Clay. So three shots, two people dead.

 

[Kurve]

Who knows though, I haven't seen the press report on exactly where Lynn said he dumped Hill's keys and the knife or if they were found.

In considering the keys and blade won't burn, if Lynn was telling the truth they probably should have been located. Telling lies about where he dumped the keys and knife might be something the prosecution can use.

 

[jason_recliner]

Could he be acquitted and walk?

Nup. He's getting at least a manslaughter conviction IMO.

 

[FrankGrimes]

Well for making up a story tbh, he could have done better. It's very complex with a lot of moving parts that he needs to make fit with him as the victim acting in self defence.

It wasn't really necessary to introduce the knife and make it even more fantastical. All he had to do was create a scenario where 74yo Hill bled and died.

Edit: This is in part why I think a knife was involved but he's simply changed a couple of elements, he's made Hill die by his own knife when it was Lynn's knife, he's made Hill die last when he was the first to die and he probably didn't die straight away. He lived long enough to yell out to Clay which has triggered Lynn in to immediate elsewhere action and the cover up.

Yep agreed, accidentally being killed by a knife in a wrestle to too far fetched, should have gone the self defence route like you said.
He has done a remarkable job though covering up the crime, I think he is a goner though, hard to believe 2 accidental deaths imo.

 

[MrsBlueSky]

Even without the dfence putting forward their case, at this stage, I can see a lot of potential similarities between GL's case and George Pell.
If Lynn gets found guilty by the jury then he can apply for an appeal and if that doesn't work can go to the high court, where Pell won his case.

How George Pell won in the High Court on a legal technicality

This High Court appeal did not ask whether Pell committed the offences. It asked whether the two majority judges in the Victorian Court of Appeal, in dismissing Pell’s earlier appeal, made an error.

theconversation.com

 

[nut]

My scenario of what might have happened.

Hill uses his drone to “wave” to people as one witness testified. Basically saying to people he can see them with his drone.

Hill sounds like a righteous person who has strong opinions.

Hill has visited the area for years and has a strong connection to the high country. He feels apart of it and has a level of ownership over the area, having previously worked there.

Hill has had a family member killed deer hunting and this makes him look out for anyone doing the wrong thing.

What does Hill use his drone for? Does he make videos and take photo ? Or is it used manly to observe things.

Lynn works in a highly regulated industry.. everything he does gets checked and recorded.

Lynn likes to escape to the high country and loves the freedom to do what ever he likes out bush, with out anyone observing what he is doing, this is what attracts him the most to the remoteness. He can get away from all the stresses.

Lynn has set up camp first.

Hill and Clay arrive and set up
Camp in close proximity.

Lynn would be annoyed his privacy and his desire to be out on his own has now been intruded upon.

Hill doesn’t even ask if he can camp up close to Lynn. This would annoy Lynn more.

Hill starts flying drone and flies over Lynn’s camp.

Lynn is now even more pissed off.

Lynn grabs gun and approaches Hill and Clays camp threatening to shoot the drone out of the sky.

Lynn claims he flying it illegally.

Hill claims Lynn has been drinking and shouldn’t have a loaded gun.
Heated argument starts.

Lynn Shoots Drone

Hill approaches his car to radio his mates to call the cops.

Lynn threatens Hill to get away from the Car…
Hill and Lynn wrestle with gun.
Clay is shot trying to help Hill.

Both men are now still fighting..

Lynn over powers Hill and kills him.

 

[theouthouse]

Could he be acquitted and walk?
Any time related to interference of a corpse would be time served given he has done 2.5 years and counting.
While no legal definition exists for beyond reasonable doubt best explanation is all other reasonable possibilities can be excluded.
Now the only other reasonable possibility we've been given instead of a headshot and moving bodies = murder is GLs explanation.
IMO it is far fetched so he will need to sell it. Or does the defence think they've enough to wear manslaughter.
That's the Max so GL testifies for an all or nothing shot

Put it this way in GLs story.

They are having an even tussell of strength over a gun that goes off. The only way this tussell is resolved is RH chooses to let go of the gun to check on CC.

RH then comes at GL with a knife, while GL has possession of a gun, which RH had previously stolen.

Do you think the force applied by GL to the extent where RH falls on his own knife is reasonable in self defense when you have a gun?
Do you take on someone with a knife when you have a gun and were in an equal strength wrestle with them beforehand over said gun?

Every part of GL story lacks any insight into his own behaviour and actions. Yet it is cold, calculated and very callous.

The bodies were dumped about 30kms ESE from the camp site. According to press report from GL he led police to a spot about 30km WNW from the camp spot where he got rid of the phones, keys, drone and knife. Noting these are 180 degrees in the opposite direction to the camp and body sites over about 60km in rugged terrain.

IMO

 

[ApplesandBananas]

Police had been listening into all GL conversations.

The bloke GL liked talking to himself and had said a Goodbye to his wife and boys. Taken a bottle of whiskey and made another impromptu drive up to the HC.

The "listener" said his talking to himself sounded "off" and the listener deemed (after listenting to over 3000+ conversations)..... that GL was about to take his own life. Media have reported on this.

If anyone listened to me in the Car all they'd hear is:
Toot toot !!
Fu**k Off - you idiot !
Oh YOU moron !
Indicate you tosser !
WTAF !
+ constant sing a longs to my selection of music on CDs ! "Wake me up before you go go"
Toot toot toot !!! lol

Thanks, I wasn't aware of the media reports - so if he is thinking of taking his own life - then there is a presumption of remorse? Not that feelings about the experience post hoc, contribute to the outcome of the trial... and doesn't speak of someone who is 'cold blooded' or 'remorseless' - unless of course he suspected he was being watched/listened to, and it was all for show.

 

[Kurve]

My scenario of what might have happened.

Hill uses his drone to “wave” to people as one witness testified. Basically saying to people he can see them with his drone.

Hill sounds like a righteous person who has strong opinions.

Hill has visited the area for years and has a strong connection to the high country. He feels apart of it and has a level of ownership over the area, having previously worked there.

Hill has had a family member killed deer hunting and this makes him look out for anyone doing the wrong thing.

What does Hill use his drone for? Does he make videos and take photo ? Or is it used manly to observe things.

Lynn works in a highly regulated industry.. everything he does gets checked and recorded.

Lynn likes to escape to the high country and loves the freedom to do what ever he likes out bush, with out anyone observing what he is doing, this is what attracts him the most to the remoteness. He can get away from all the stresses.

Lynn has set up camp first.

Hill and Clay arrive and set up
Camp in close proximity.

Lynn would be annoyed his privacy and his desire to be out on his own has now been intruded upon.

Hill doesn’t even ask if he can camp up close to Lynn. This would annoy Lynn more.

Hill starts flying drone and flies over Lynn’s camp.

Lynn is now even more pissed off.

Lynn grabs gun and approaches Hill and Clays camp threatening to shoot the drone out of the sky.

Lynn claims he flying it illegally.

Hill claims Lynn has been drinking and shouldn’t have a loaded gun.
Heated argument starts.

Lynn Shoots Drone

Hill approaches his car to radio his mates to call the cops.

Lynn threatens Hill to get away from the Car…
Hill and Lynn wrestle with gun.
Clay is shot trying to help Hill.

Both men are now still fighting..

Lynn over powers Hill and kills him.

But for the prosecution's case that Hill died first, which is what I've been trying to work with.

Going anywhere else away from that and it tends to play in to Lynn's defence.