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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
changintimes said:
And 'we' all wait so see if there is an appeal launched. That can occur within 28 days from date of conviction or longer length of time if a later application is accepted.

It is my view there will be an appeal.
Click to expand...
On what basis do you believe an appeal will be launched changintimes?

One more quick question. What's your view regarding the accused facing further charges re the destruction of the bodies of
Carol Clay and Russell Hill.

Thanks in anticipation.
 
TootsieFootsie said:
I'd really like to know why he was "told to leave the Air Force".
Because that doesn't seem to fit with what he told people over the years, ie that it was his choice.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-victoria/chilling-devil-detail-in-greg-lynns-bombshell-police-tape/news-story/6637f09dd81e22faba0a8c4c17b1b9f9?amp
Click to expand...
In the police interview, Lynn said he was “told to leave” the Air Force.

But I have read other accounts where he was (alleged) to have said he joined the Air Force as a cadet, wanting to be a fighter pilot but when he failed to make the top tier and was likely to be assigned transport planes, he quit.'

It seems Lynn isn't great with the truth at times.
 
Hsa887 said:
He’s had to cook up a story to explain the lot because of two deaths, he can’t say self defence because Carol was killed. So we get music, shooting through camp, hunting close to camp, Russell at his car this that. Some of it might be partly true who knows. The only certain parts were where Carol was killed, that a shotgun was used and that the mirror was shot off. His story is all possible but very very unlikely and you add to it all the post offence conduct to get where we are.
Click to expand...
And now we can add all his pre-offence behaviour to confirm our and the jury's opinion.
 
Cliff Hardy said:
In the police interview, Lynn said he was “told to leave” the Air Force.

But I have read other accounts where he was (alleged) to have said he joined the Air Force as a cadet, wanting to be a fighter pilot but when he failed to make the top tier and was likely to be assigned transport planes, he quit.'

It seems Lynn isn't great with the truth at times.
Click to expand...
Or playing second fiddle.
 
Kemug said:
And now we can add all his pre-offence behaviour to confirm our and the jury's opinion.
Click to expand...

When he was initially arrested and all these stories came out about it raised serious questions about his character and didn't help his situation.

I wonder how his story would have been viewed if he had the opposite background and stories coming out when he was arrested.
 
AussieIan said:
When he was initially arrested and all these stories came out about it raised serious questions about his character and didn't help his situation.

I wonder how his story would have been viewed if he had the opposite background and stories coming out when he was arrested.
Click to expand...
Interesting idea. But we'll never know.
 
Cliff Hardy said:
Correct but a good defence does everything they possibly can to discredit any evidence provided by the prosecution and at the same time paint the defendant in the best possible light with the jury. Dann failed to do this as evidenced by the guilty verdict.
Click to expand...

The role of an expert witness is to provide relevant and impartial evidence in their area of expertise. Dann disputed the evidence given by prosecutions ballistics expert, Paul Griffiths, yet chose not to call an expert for the Defence. IMO that's quite odd and it may be that he doesn't believe his Lynn's version.

Counsel's first duty is to the court. If a client tells him that he's innocent, he has to act on that, even if he disbelieves him. It then becomes his duty make the prosecution prove their case beyond reasonable doubt and ensure the client gets a fair trial and the shortest sentence possible. That's what I believe has happened here.
 
Last edited:
JudgeJudi said:
The role of an expert witness is to provide relevant and impartial evidence in their area of expertise. Dann disputed the evidence given by prosecutions ballistics expert, Paul Griffiths, yet chose not to call an expert for the Defence. IMO that's quite odd and it may be that he doesn't believe his Lynn's version.

Counsel's first duty is to the court. If a client tells him that he's innocent, he has to act on that, even if he disbelieves him. It then becomes his duty make the prosecution prove their case beyond reasonable doubt and ensure the client gets a fair trial and the shortest sentence possible. That's what I believe has happened here.
Click to expand...

Dann being the highly proficient KC that he is, probably recognised the ballistic evidence was the crux of the case. There was none for Russell Hill and only the slug found two years later with Carol Clay’s DNA detected.

If Dann could discredit that part of the prosecution’s case it’s very probable Lynn gets off on both charges. Pretty solid legal strategy IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 184 more.
Total: 660 (members: 185, guests: 475)

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
475
Total visitors
660
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,286
Messages
18,237,348
Members
234,333
Latest member
CyberInvestigator
Back
Top