Australia - Russell Hill & Carol Clay Murdered While Camping - Wonnangatta Valley, 2020 #9

[SouthAussie]

To be fair, in my opinion zero and none, means the same thing.
No lies and zero lies means the same thing.

Not that I believe him, I don't

(Just jumping off your post)

I think it is just really hard to be fair about what Dann is saying now.

He participated in a trial for his client.
He had achieved getting a lot of evidence thrown out.
The judge ruled multiple times in his favour (thank goodness, because that helps against an appeal being accepted).
The judge ruled so much in his favour that we all started wondering what the heck was going on.

Now Dann is having a big whinge because sub judice is over, and all of the dirt about his client is legally allowed to be published.

No doubt he is still trying to do his best for his client, but it all does sound a little preposterous because a KC certainly knows all of the sub judice and other laws. I think Dann probably doesn't have a lot to work with - just attack, attack, attack, and hope for the best.

imo

 

[Cliff Hardy]

Your question could well be proven to be obsolete if a mistral is declared and a permanent stat is then declared. IMO

Gregory Lynn is a convicted murderer awaiting sentencing. Anything outside of that is just plain wishful thinking.

 

[sapphire blue]

perhaps you need to read a very important paragraph included in media coverage. What this indicates clearly IMO is that the deliberate campaign and accusations against GL since the conviction have supported the future natural cause of justice and have the reverse affect of what had obviously been intended by the source behind such media coverage, including social media.

Camper killer Greg Lynn’s extraordinary plan to have murder conviction quashed

To clear their client of Carol Clay’s murder the former pilot’s lawyers are considering using a law successfully applied in the state only once before.

www.theage.com.au

The following is a quote of what was said by Dermot Dann KC:

View attachment 519039

do you understand how language can be used in deceptive ways?

Saying "he maintains he’s told zero lies" can be deceptive depending on the context and the intent behind the statement.

1. Literal Truth: If someone has truly never told a lie in their life, saying "I've told zero lies" is factually correct. However, it might come across as boastful or overly emphatic, depending on the situation.
2. Deceptive Intent: In everyday conversation, saying "I've told zero lies" could be misleading if the person has actually told lies but is trying to present themselves as completely truthful. This can be a deceptive statement if used to create a false impression of honesty or trustworthiness.

In summary, the truthfulness of the statement depends on the actual history of the person's honesty and the intention behind making such a claim. If there is any doubt or if the statement is made to manipulate perception, it can be considered deceptive.

Intention speaks volumes in this particular case, and this is after all a victim friendly forum and GL is only a victim of his own actions.

 

[sapphire blue]

To be fair, in my opinion zero and none, means the same thing.
No lies and zero lies means the same thing.

Not that I believe him, I don't

They don’t actually mean the same thing.

If you had 2 cookies and ate them they still existed didn’t they? There weren’t zero cookies to begin with. You have no cookies because of your actions.

 

[SouthAussie]

do you understand how language can be used in deceptive ways?

Saying "he maintains he’s told zero lies" can be deceptive depending on the context and the intent behind the statement.

1. Literal Truth: If someone has truly never told a lie in their life, saying "I've told zero lies" is factually correct. However, it might come across as boastful or overly emphatic, depending on the situation.
2. Deceptive Intent: In everyday conversation, saying "I've told zero lies" could be misleading if the person has actually told lies but is trying to present themselves as completely truthful. This can be a deceptive statement if used to create a false impression of honesty or trustworthiness.

In summary, the truthfulness of the statement depends on the actual history of the person's honesty and the intention behind making such a claim. If there is any doubt or if the statement is made to manipulate perception, it can be considered deceptive.

Intention speaks volumes in this particular case, and this is after all a victim friendly forum and GL is a victim of his own actions.

There is also proof that Dann's client directly lied to the police. He told them there was "nothing left" after he burned the remains. He didn't tell them that he had moved the burned watch, a burned ring, the teeth, the fragments of bone to a root ball hole of a fallen tree. The police had to find that for themselves.

imo

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/greg-lynn-trial-jury-in-accused-doublemurder-case-to-hear-from-forensic-anthropologist/news-story/9ef54498f3d18793019b1f2dc8c568a2

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Sorry if I misunderstood.
I wasn't talking or thinking about him when I posted.

I actually held off for awhile, but it niggled at me.

In my opinion most people think of zero and none as the same.

I now see I was the one wrong because it seems they aren't. I've learned something new, to me.

Though If someone said to me they have told zero lies in their life, I would still believe they meant they'd told no lies.

Anyway, thanks for adding to my knowledge.

To add. I don't believe a word he says about anything and never have.

 

[changintimes]

(Just jumping off your post)

I think it is just really hard to be fair about what Dann is saying now.

He participated in a trial for his client.
He had achieved getting a lot of evidence thrown out.
The judge ruled multiple times in his favour (thank goodness, because that helps against an appeal being accepted).
The judge ruled so much in his favour that we all started wondering what the heck was going on.

Now Dann is having a big whinge because sub judice is over, and all of the dirt about his client is legally allowed to be published.

No doubt he is still trying to do his best for his client, but it all does sound a little preposterous because a KC certainly knows all of the sub judice and other laws. I think Dann probably doesn't have a lot to work with - just attack, attack, attack, and hope for the best.

imo

‘He maintains he told zero lies’: Greg Lynn to appeal conviction in high country murder case, court hears

Jury had found former Jetstar pilot guilty of killing Carol Clay, but not of murdering Russell Hill

www.theguardian.com

 

[changintimes]

They don’t actually mean the same thing.

If you had 2 cookies and ate them they still existed didn’t they? There weren’t zero cookies to begin with. You have no cookies because of your actions.

<modsnip - personalizing> The comment made by Dann was

‘He maintains he told zero lies’: Greg Lynn to appeal conviction in high country murder case, court hears

Jury had found former Jetstar pilot guilty of killing Carol Clay, but not of murdering Russell Hill

www.theguardian.com

There was NO mention of the word NO!

 

[Eaglette]

Semantics

Could also be considered "lying by omission" - so hasn't told a lie !

 

[Cliff Hardy]

In summary, the truthfulness of the statement depends on the actual history of the person's honesty and the intention behind making such a claim.

We know Greg Lynn is a liar. He initially told the police he had never met Russell Hill and Carol Clay.

Lynn then provided the police and the court with his little fantasy story of how Hill and Clay died and we saw how well that went with the jury.

Lynn is a liar and a murderer.

 

[Kemug]

He said his client continued to protest his innocence. "He maintains that he's never killed any person at any time, at any place, anywhere, ever".

RSBM
Methinks he doth protest too much.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Let him try to appeal.

In my opinion he isn't a very appealing person

 

[MIG214222]

At the time of the (self admitted) destruction of the deceased persons, GL was not aware that his (later) intended drive route would include cctv cameras that would capture image of his vehicle and trailer and number plates. He was also not aware that the RH and CC mobile telephones were still switched on (and later) and would ping to local towers. Therefore, IMO, his statement about reasons for his actions were to protect his family and himself make sense.

BBM
Hello @changintimes,
Now don't that go to show how dumb the master-of-the-universe *truly* was & is!
GL's self-serving actions & statements have only ever been for him & about him, why on earth do you think he's in this slight pickle sweetheart?

At the end of the day - a dumb petty thief & a murderer, with a receding chin, what an unfortunate - ugly - combination!

MOO, MOO, MOO

Gregory Lynn is a convicted murderer awaiting sentencing. Anything outside of that is just plain wishful thinking.

Hi Cliff Hardy,
Accompanied by the wail of a 1000-poorly-tuned-tiny-violins - screeching out the 'woe-is-me' score played by a convicted-lying-murderer-with-a-receding-chin.
He's a player - in more ways than one & a very, very dangerous individual.

Roll on sentencing & justice.

My thoughts remain with the Clay & Hill families, I wish them all the strength in the universe.
MOO

 

[sapphire blue]

Sorry if I misunderstood.
I wasn't talking or thinking about him when I posted.

I actually held off for awhile, but it niggled at me.

In my opinion most people think of zero and none as the same.

I now see I was the one wrong because it seems they aren't. I've learned something new, to me.

Though If someone said to me they have told zero lies in their life, I would still believe they meant they'd told no lies.

Anyway, thanks for adding to my knowledge.

To add. I don't believe a word he says about anything and never have.

no apology needed.

These days I’m not so quick to believe someone claiming they’ve told zero lies, as I’ve learnt that narcissists often believe their lies, they can’t admit they’ve done wrong, they have to protect their fragile ego at all costs. They are very good at arguing, twisting the blame, and coming up with all sorts of excuses to justify their behaviour.

 

[sapphire blue]

<modsnip - personalizing> The comment made by Dann was
View attachment 519079

‘He maintains he told zero lies’: Greg Lynn to appeal conviction in high country murder case, court hears

Jury had found former Jetstar pilot guilty of killing Carol Clay, but not of murdering Russell Hill

www.theguardian.com

There was NO mention of the word NO!

No mention of the word no was my point. There’s a reason he deliberately avoids using it, and as we know from the court case he has actually lied.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

These days I’m not so quick to believe someone claiming they’ve told zero lies,

Thanks I just wanted to say that I've never believed him either.

I wasn't defending him.

It was just what the words meant, and I now can see what you meant.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

no apology needed.

Yes you're right. I agree no apology is needed

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Camper killer may use rare legal move to delay sentence

Greg Lynn's lawyer indicated he will appeal his murder conviction over the death of camper Carol Clay and...

www.northweststar.com.au

Mr Dann then flagged his intention to seek a rare legal move to delay Lynn's sentence under s309 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

"The law says such an application could only be allowed in highly unusual, highly extreme situations," he said.
"That is an extremely rare application to even make and even more rare to be granted."

Justice Michael Croucher said the application to stay, if granted, would delay Lynn's sentence pending an appeal.

 

[BreakingNews]

We know Greg Lynn is a liar. He initially told the police he had never met Russell Hill and Carol Clay.

Lynn then provided the police and the court with his little fantasy story of how Hill and Clay died and we saw how well that went with the jury.

Lynn is a liar and a murderer.

And now Dann will try to get him off on a technicality. Lynn will still be a liar and a murderer. And a wife abuser and a violent animal killer. Dann can't change that!

 

[changintimes]

do you understand how language can be used in deceptive ways?

Saying "he maintains he’s told zero lies" can be deceptive depending on the context and the intent behind the statement.

1. Literal Truth: If someone has truly never told a lie in their life, saying "I've told zero lies" is factually correct. However, it might come across as boastful or overly emphatic, depending on the situation.
2. Deceptive Intent: In everyday conversation, saying "I've told zero lies" could be misleading if the person has actually told lies but is trying to present themselves as completely truthful. This can be a deceptive statement if used to create a false impression of honesty or trustworthiness.

In summary, the truthfulness of the statement depends on the actual history of the person's honesty and the intention behind making such a claim. If there is any doubt or if the statement is made to manipulate perception, it can be considered deceptive.

Intention speaks volumes in this particular case, and this is after all a victim friendly forum and GL is only a victim of his own actions.

And truth is truth. It is that simple.