Australia - Russell Hill & Carol Clay Murdered While Camping - Wonnangatta Valley, 2020 #7

[madoodi]

Realistically who would fight with an elderly man purportedly in pyjamas allegedly stealing your loaded gun from the car to report you for not properly securing the same to police at 9-10pm at night? Very clearly he wasn’t going to report anything at that time of night…. Why not try to calm and appease him?

Realistically, his whole story of what happened makes no sense.
I personally feel RH and CC were in bed for the night when GL came to confront them perhaps about the drone. Because it just makes no sense to me that in the dark RH would walk over to a stranger's car and take a gun (that he would presume would be stored correctly). Just makes no sense.

The way he destoyed all the evidence (goodness knows if what he said he did to the drone/phones are correct) and poor RH and CC's remains is so cold, callous and pure evil.

If he was truly innocent and he was so calm under pressure, he would know, in his "calm" state that if he preserved the evidence, that would prove his innocence.

I feel so bad for the victims and their grieving families and hope justice is served.

All IMO.

 

[solari]

Realistically who would fight with an elderly man purportedly in pyjamas allegedly stealing your loaded gun from the car to report you for not properly securing the same to police at 9-10pm at night? Very clearly he wasn’t going to report anything at that time of night…. Why not try to calm and appease him?

I've seen how intense someone can get over someone touching their guitar without permission at a live gig, I can only imagine how some people would react to someone allegedly going for their firearm.... Think about it. If this was a partly true account by GL, do you think he remained calm if RH did decide to pick up his fire arm without permission? Just food for thought.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I don't believe the part about Russell going after GL with a knife. Or of Russell having shot Carol.
Part of Carol's skull was later found at Russell and Carols camp site.

I believe both Russell and Carol were killed at their camp site after GL became incensed when Russell came to his campsite to ask him to turn the noise down. He got his gun and followed them back to their site.

As far as I know, Gl only burned Russell and Carols campsite, not his own.
And that's because, unlike at Russell and Carols site, there was no blood or remains at his site.
There was nothing that needed to be destroyed at his site because nothing happened there.

So no I don't believe his account of what happened.

 

[emirates1957]

If this is what the judge said then IMO it opens the door to anyone similarly inclined to take a page out of Lynn's copybook and (assuming he's found not guilty) also get away with murder.

Brilliant point.

 

[jjleroche]

Then there was the previous time he repainted his car, because he didn't like the colour or it was a bit rusty, I forget.

Yes, just getting the right shade seems to have been very important to him.

He's an "artist". That's for sure. JMO

 

[ProfCluezo]

I've seen how intense someone can get over someone touching their guitar without permission at a live gig, I can only imagine how some people would react to someone allegedly going for their firearm.... Think about it. If this was a partly true account by GL, do you think he remained calm if RH did decide to pick up his fire arm without permission? Just food for thought.

I think I would realise he was angry (if this hadn’t been obvious before) and try to appease the person. I can’t imagine fighting over a loaded gun, especially if it wasn’t being pointed at me….

 

[mrjitty]

The way I understand it, the prosecution's version of events didn't support a charge of manslaughter, and Lynn's version of events also didn't support a charge of manslaughter.
As no possible scenarios or evidence related to a manslaughter charge came to light during the course of the trial, the only options open to the jury for each death is now murder, or nothing.

As Lynn has already admitted to destruction of evidence, that charge isn't being contested and as such the jury don't need to make a finding about it.

I agree.

GL does not allege he killed them negligently. There is no evidence to support such a finding. Either he murdered them, or the jury find reasonable doubt - i.e. Lynns version was not ruled out as a reasonable possibility.

IMO

 

[solari]

I think I would realise he was angry (if this hadn’t been obvious before) and try to appease the person. I can’t imagine fighting over a loaded gun, especially if it wasn’t being pointed at me….

Exactly, RH was mentioned earlier in the thread regarding chatting to some hunter campers previous to the ill fated night about a few things including the importance of gun safety and the story about the person RH knew being killed in a hunting accident, based on the story mentioned and other stories about his character I can't see him escalating, I would imagine him appeasing if there was a potentially loaded gun involved... But will we ever know the actual truth of the events that occured that night?
My gut feeling, moo, is that GL is not telling a truthful account of the events that occured and unfortunately RH and CC cannot speak in court to say otherwise.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Yes, just getting the right shade seems to have been very important to him.

You could say that he's a bit "shady"

 

[SouthAussie]

I've seen how intense someone can get over someone touching their guitar without permission at a live gig, I can only imagine how some people would react to someone allegedly going for their firearm.... Think about it. If this was a partly true account by GL, do you think he remained calm if RH did decide to pick up his fire arm without permission? Just food for thought.

If Lynn was that concerned about someone touching his firearms, he likely wouldn't have left them in an open vehicle.

Not that I believe he left them in an open vehicle.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

All GL did was "tidy up" the place

 

[MaisieBella]

If he was really that meticulous and he was telling the truth why leave guns unsecured and loaded? Why not call cops straight away so the evidence would completely tally with his account of these unfortunate “accidents”?

IMO he didn’t consider calling police because he knew he was guilty… Hence the only options worth being meticulous about were how to cover up his involvement?

 

[MaisieBella]

If he was really that meticulous and he was telling the truth why leave guns unsecured and loaded? Why not call cops straight away so the evidence would completely tally with his account of these unfortunate “accidents”?

IMO he didn’t consider calling police because he knew he was guilty… Hence the only options worth being meticulous about were how to cover up his involvement?

I think the jury will come to the same conclusion.

 

[jjleroche]

He had a lot of weapons, until the police seized them .... he may have required fingerprints to be on file for some of them. IIRC when I looked at the categories (there is a VicPol list of them) semi-automatics and automatics needed fingerprints to be kept on file. And "General Category" handguns require fingerprints.


Dozens of weapons, including knives, firearms, swords and a pickaxe, were seized from the Caroline Springs home of Gregory Lynn, 56, on November 22, 2021
Weapons allegedly seized from Mr Lynn’s home include a semiautomatic pistol, two Ruger revolvers, a Winchester semiautomatic rifle, two 12-gauge shotguns, two lever-action rifles, 23 knives, two swords, two hatchets, a pickaxe and “numerous” metal cases of ammunition.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/gregory-lynn-police-probed-theory-droneuse-annoyed-accused-high-country-killer/news-story/40fd1a32e3b38a80778e6e4f55fecff6

Here is the VicPol info about it .... Apply for a new firearm licence

Very interesting information SouthAussie.

Seems to be a bit of overkill for a hunter.

I know nothing about guns, (or hunting), but realistically, if someone "hunts", wouldn't just one suffice?
Perhaps I'm being a tad mean - how about two? (For different distances maybe...)

OK. I concede that maybe I'm behaving like a killjoy, so - surely three would cover all eventualities (if one were
just a "hunter")?!! Surely....

Swords, revolvers, lever-action rifles, semiautomatics, shotguns, numerous ammo cases, 23 knives!!!, and so on.
(IIRC at some stage there was mention of him owning a silencer also.)

Reminds me a bit of revolutionary Che Guevara's elation upon opening a cache of weapons, and seeing a machine gun.
It was reported that "he was delighted by the 'marvelous spectacle' of the instruments of death".
(Excerpt from The Bill of Rights Institute - Che Guevara Injustice Narrative)

IMO GL may have a seriously unhealthy interest in weapons designed to kill with devastating efficiency. (Power?)

JMO

 

[SouthAussie]

If he was really that meticulous and he was telling the truth why leave guns unsecured and loaded?

I think that, according to his story, he did not leave them loaded. Russell supposedly grabbed a magazine (I don't know from where), and the shotgun out of a zipped gun bag.


Daniel Porceddu: "On your version, Mr Hill's fingerprints would've also been on the magazine?"
Mr Lynn: "Yes." Link

He told the jury the gun was secured in a zipped bag, and the doors were locked, but he unlocked the vehicle when he chose to blare music to annoy Mr Hill. Link

 

[Cliff Hardy]

Dann took advantage of the defence summing up second by pointed the finger at Porceddu and claiming he didn't play fair. I just wish Porceddu had pointed the finger at Dann for trying to insult the jury's intelligence with his fairy story.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Judge Croucher told the jury that manslaughter will no longer be available as an alternative charge. “... The only charges before you are murder.” Both parties agreed if the jury found the prosecution could not prove murder, a manslaughter verdict “would be wrong”.

He told the jury they must enter deliberations viewing GL as an innocent man who “does not need to prove anything”, unless the prosecution was able to displace that.

Giving an overview of both parties’ submissions, the judge said the prosecution’s “circumstantial” case was asking the jury to infer the only reason GL would burn the campsite, dispose of the couple’s belongings and bodies and paint his car and trailer was because he “believed” he had murdered RH and CC.

He told the jury the prosecution was arguing the jury could use 11 actions taken by GL after the deaths as “incriminating conduct” that allegedly points to his belief he had murdered the couple.

He said GL accepts this “terrible and selfish” conduct occurred, doing so not because he had murdered the pair, but because he feared he would be wrongly blamed. “It is for the prosecution to satisfy you the only reasonable explanation is because he had murdered Mr Hill and Mrs Clay”.

Croucher told the jury crown prosecutor Porceddu had failed to directly challenge GL on this on the stand, instead arguing it was “implicit” in his questioning. “Had he asked these questions Mr Lynn could have been able to respond in a powerful and compelling way. Therefore you must take into account that Mr Lynn was not given the chance to respond to the imputation ... Because of this breach of the basic rules of fairness, you may more readily reject the prosecution arguments and the inferences the prosecution wants you to draw.”

He reminded jurors that GL had no obligation to speak to police or take the stand, saying this did not change that the prosecution had to prove his guilt.

Link

The judge is essentially telling the jury that all the circumstantial evidence followed their deaths but was not the cause, but the way he's worded everything, I feel like he's not so subtly advising them that the prosecution hasn't proven their case.

 

[Spectrix]

Not to mention extremely good eyesight as he believed they were in their pyjamas. Where was he when he saw them and why was he perving on them?

I believe in the process of removing both bodies from the crime scene, GL most probably gained a reasonable idea of what the pair were wearing. He suggested that the pair may have been in bed at the time that he turned the music up.

I went though the evidence and statements over dinner with a good friend of mine, she had a theory that GL may have used the loud music to lure RH to his campsite.
I am impartial about the case but that theory certainly gave me pause for thought. The prosecution certainly hasn't offered any theories about the circumstances of RH's death (as there is no evidence to support them).

 

[Kemug]

He told the jury the gun was secured in a zipped bag, and the doors were locked, but he unlocked the vehicle when he chose to blare music to annoy Mr Hill. Link

RSBM
And that is also very childish. Whether he's a murderer or not (and I believe he is), he doesn't come out of this looking good. Even if he was my husband, and I firmly believed in his innocence, I would still not like the man he has been exposed to be. I think I would be leaving him regardless.

 

[Poirot's niece]

All GL did was "tidy up" the place

As you do when you have two dead bodies and a pair of jetstar gloves in the middle of nowhere. He's a real helper alright.