Australia - Russell Hill & Carol Clay Murdered While Camping - Wonnangatta Valley, 2020 #8

[SouthAussie]

Lynn now has 28 days to appeal his conviction, if he is going to appeal.

His defence team would submit documents to the Court of Appeal - they must outline the question of law relating to evidence or misdirection of law. (probably why the judge was so tight with the evidence, and the removal of the manslaughter option imo)

The appeal court will either reject or allow the appeal application.

If an appeal hearing is granted, it is not a re-trial. It is 3 judges considering if the law was correctly applied during the trial.

Then the 3 judges may either order a re-trial OR dismiss the appeal OR set the conviction aside and free Lynn.

Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council data says that the median murder sentence is 23.3 years, with a median non-parole period of 18 years.

(paraphrased from this article)

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-victoria/what-happens-now-for-lynn-after-shock-split-verdict/news-story/4e108ccad0a5dea80778a16eea42834b?amp

 

[SouthAussie]

Leading legal expert flags further charges for Lynn

One of the country's leading legal experts believes convicted murderer Greg Lynn could face further charges...

9now.nine.com.au

Apparently - according to 'legal experts' - it is highly unusual for further charges (like said destruction of evidence) to be filed after a trial.
Though the prosecution is likely to speak of that as an aggravating factor at the sentencing hearing.

(Paraphrased from this article)

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-victoria/what-happens-now-for-lynn-after-shock-split-verdict/news-story/4e108ccad0a5dea80778a16eea42834b?amp

 

[JBowie]

‘Butt naked’: Lynn’s secret car tapes revealed

After Greg Lynn was found guilty of the murder of Carol Clay and not guilty of murdering Russell Hill, wild new details of the police investigation can be revealed.

au.news.yahoo.com

"So please help me help you.”

That and "The truth will set you free" are two sentences that I always wait to hear from cops when I watch video interrogations of suspects.

 

[ProfCluezo]

Interesting that GLs “truth” did not deliver….

 

[JudgeJudi]

“Look, the assumption is that I’m the villain. In fact, ah, I think I’m the victim of all of this,” he said. He claimed at the time not to have met RH and CC during the trip, but this was cut from the record that was played to the jury. IMO the jury were entitled to know this. It goes to whether or not he's truthful and is to be believed or that he's a habitual liar who will say and do whatever he thinks will save him. Not happy Jan.

Link

 

[Cliff Hardy]

It's a pity the police didn't follow process as well as they might have or the lies Lynn's told them would have been admissible in the trial.

It allowed the defence to give the jury the impression Lynn had assisted police from the beginning. When the reality is he gave the police 6 hours of 'No Comment' before answering any questions.

Even when he did start cooperating, Lynn claimed he had never met Russell Hill and Carol Clay.

Lynn enjoyed a charmed run. From destroying all the evidence to having some of the most crucial things he said deemed inadmissible. Yet justice still prevailed.

 

[JudgeJudi]

From what I've seen on TV and read in the media, everyone, including lawyers, was shocked by the split verdict.

 

[SouthAussie]

It's a pity the police didn't follow process as well as they might have or the lies Lynn's told them would have been admissible in the trial.

It allowed the defence to give the jury the impression Lynn had assisted police from the beginning. When the reality is he gave the police 6 hours of 'No Comment' before answering any questions.

Even when he did start cooperating, Lynn claimed he had never met Russell Hill and Carol Clay.

Lynn enjoyed a charmed run. From destroying all the evidence to having some of the most crucial things he said deemed inadmissible. Yet justice still prevailed.

I actually don't understand why big parts of his formal police interview weren't allowed into evidence. I am sure there is a good, legal reason ... but I haven't come across that reason in what I have read.

All I have seen is that they first sent in two detectives to chat with him. To loosen him up. One was very familiar with bush life. They fed him, they rested him, let him shower, he was interviewed for no more than 3 hours each day.

I do understand why the judge didn't allow the informal recorded questioning at his home, as he hadn't been cautioned. But I also understand why he wasn't cautioned ... because they didn't want to put the heebie jeebies too far up him at that point in time.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Then I was in the foreground looking back at my dead body

Funny how in my dream I had a body like a model

 

[JBowie]

I actually don't understand why big parts of his formal police interview weren't allowed into evidence.

Neither do I. All I've read is that Croucher didn't like it from a fairness aspect and ruled it out.

I said earlier, before the verdict, that I am not a fan of Croucher. However, here maybe the end justified the means.

 

[Bats]

Here's the DDP's appeal against the judge in pre trial. This info has been has been surpressed until today.

DPP v Lynn [2024] VSCA 62 (12 April 2024)

 

[SouthAussie]

Here's the DDP's appeal against the judge in pre trial. This info has been has been surpressed until today.

DPP v Lynn [2024] VSCA 62 (12 April 2024)

Geez, it sounds as if the jury was not going to be allowed to make a decision based on what happened. If the Crown hadn't taken Croucher's pre-trial decisions to appeal. (No wonder Croucher seemed so grumpy.)

Eg:
one death happening right after the other
the remains being destroyed

One thing is for sure, for those people who have said that Russell had 'hunting experience' .... "Neither Mr Hill nor Mrs Clay were licensed or known to have any experience or interest in firearms".

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Yes it went from a relative of Russell's being killed hunting to Russell being a hunter himself.
I think it's different in some countries but here most people would never have even seen a gun let alone owned one.

In reality I've only seen guns in a museum. I don't know anyone who does own a gun.

 

[BreakingNews]

It can also mean, Oh well ...

Oh well would have been a shrug of the shoulders. Raised eyebrows means surprised, especially after the first Not Guilty.

 

[ScottToorak]

A few of my personal observations from the case.
1. Victoria Police were pretty woeful in their investigations, surveillance and interview techniques. Allowing Lynn the opportunity to go back to the bodies and destroy them when he was a suspect is very poor policing in my view.
2. Lynn has been found guilty of one murder and now all of a sudden there is talk of re-opening an investigation into the death of his first wife. Why has it taken until now to potentially re-open an investigation into the death of his first wife? What has Victoria Police been waiting for?
3. It is now blatantly obvious to all that 60 minutes etc is used by police to assist in finding killers etc. Not good going forward.

 

[JBowie]

Oh well would have been a shrug of the shoulders. Raised eyebrows means surprised, especially after the first Not Guilty.

With Lynn anything is possible. Not important in the scheme of things.

 

[BreakingNews]

Not surprised they weren't told. That's the way things usually go but sometimes it is astonishing after a verdict is delivered, the stuff you hear about the defendant.

For me as a juror, we heard later that the murderer had attempted murder previously, same motive. At least we got his murder correct. All that other stuff can be brought up at the sentencing.

 

[ProfCluezo]

“Look, the assumption is that I’m the villain. In fact, ah, I think I’m the victim of all of this,” he said.

This is a classic example of blameshifting and inversion of responsibility - instead of taking ownership GL maintains “I’m not a villain I’m a victim…”

Most people would consider the two parties who died (and their families, friends and loved ones) to be victims - yet in a wholly egocentric way the accused seems to be trying to coerce others into his delusional fantasy that he is the victim…. ??

 

[JudgeJudi]

I do hope Vic Pol were following on websleuths back then and/or that certain shall I say ‘curiosities’ were brought to their attention.

I don't know about VicPol but WA police followed WS in the WA Claremont serial killer (Bradley Evans) case. Tricia had to shut down one of the threads after LE contacted her .

Some criminals in the US also read WS. Jennifer Faith arranged for her boyfriend to murder her husband. She texted him, “Did you read through any of that stupid “Websleuths” thread I sent you?”. She's now serving life in prison and he got 62 years.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

I actually don't understand why big parts of his formal police interview weren't allowed into evidence. I am sure there is a good, legal reason ... but I haven't come across that reason in what I have read.

The detectives mislead Lynn into believing he was simply assisting them rather than already a suspect and didn't read him his rights early enough. There were also issues with the line of questioning the detectives employed. Including making him promises they couldn't actually keep.

The result of all that was the judge allowed the defence to cherry pick whatever they wanted from that the police interview while the prosecution were unable to use any of it. This allowed the defence to, in effect, mislead the jury about how cooperative Lynn had been and also mislead the jury that Lynn had been completely truthful, when the reality is he also told lies, including that he claimed he had never met Hill or Clay.