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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

AussieIan said:
Hell I questioned you guys a lot but the new blokes like a dog chasing a car.


Anyway re: the money situation and Melanie and his kids, he'd have a fair bit in super for them, enough for a house even if they lost their one. Even if he was on decent coin at 260k the tax man cuts that down a lot. If he was smart he'd have been contributing the maximum to his super and his family (I assume?) be able to claim thst given his situation? At least half of it.

He should have more than a million in there.
Click to expand...
Yes. They're in a fine position compared to the loved ones of the victims, who will never have the opportunity to see the victims again, and IMO will be forever traumatised.
JMO
 
TootsieFootsie said:
I actually feel bad for the situation his wife and family have found themselves in through no fault of their own.
I don't think it's right or fair that they should be punished for his crimes.
Click to expand...

May I respectfully ask. In what way are they getting punished? Are you referring to the potential victims of crime compensation claim that could be forthcoming?
 
changintimes said:
When you watch the full police interview, at 15.41 which is near the end of the session when Detective
Florence is seeking clarification from GL about the process involved in the skirmish after RH with knife in hand approaches GL and GL explains how RH fell on top of him and ended up stabbing himself (that is RH), Detective Florence then stated "yeah that makes sense". During this whole particular process, Detective Florence is captured on screen and you can tell he is choosing his words very carefully.

A reminder that this is the part of the tape that the jury members requested to re-view.

IMO it was the careful questioning and clarifications made by Detective Florence that enabled the jury members to for their "not guilty" outcome regarding the death of RH.

Below is a image of the moment Detective Florence 'play acts' as he is describing what occurred after GL falls to the ground after RH pushed him and then fell on him and the knife he was holding in his hand stabbed him after he fell oGLtop of GL.View attachment 520326
Click to expand...

At the start of the trial Greg is afforded the presumption of innocence.

Brett Florence's questioning didn't 'enable' Greg to be more innocent.

The jury were beyond doubt that Greg murdered Carol and probably couldn't resolve how Russell died because evidence was destroyed.
 
Last edited:
wallyworld said:
For who?
Click to expand...

The supposition is if Carol Clay’s family lodge a victim of crime compensation claim and it’s approved it comes from the offender’s means.

If there’s not enough liquidity to satisfy that claim it comes from the offender’s assets. In this case whatever equity is held in those assets that can be liquidated to satisfy the claim.

It’s been argued and somewhat supported that the main asset subject to a possible claim would be the primary residence in Caroline Springs. The one GL transferred to sole proprietorship in his wife’s name in an attempt to protect that asset from these sorts of proceedings. IMHO.

Not sure if this is helpful for you it’s just my opinion.
 
Sir_Loin said:
The supposition is if Carol Clay’s family lodge a victim of crime compensation claim and it’s approved it comes from the offender’s means.

If there’s not enough liquidity to satisfy that claim it comes from the offender’s assets. In this case whatever equity is held in those assets that can be liquidated to satisfy the claim.

It’s been argued and somewhat supported that the main asset subject to a possible claim would be the primary residence in Caroline Springs. The one GL transferred to sole proprietorship in his wife’s name in an attempt to protect that asset from these sorts of proceedings. IMHO.

Not sure if this is helpful for you it’s just my opinion.
Click to expand...
thanks for the detailed reply and apologies as I have just realised that my question wasn't warranted.
It was late and I think I misunderstood what I was reading. In the light of day reading back over your comment, it makes complete sense.
 
Sir_Loin said:
You could also argue Brett Florence said that incredulously even somewhat sarcastically given the unbelievable story he just heard come out of this guy’s mouth.

To defend against a knife attack in this manner is straight out of an action movie. It’s total BS.
Click to expand...
The Jury is likely to have taken notice of Florence's words and their literal meaning.
 
Bats said:
Yes, I agree.

If Brett Florence had have said something like...." You've got to be kidding! Are you lying Greg?"....then it would be interview over.

It was a masterful interview by the two detectives.
Click to expand...
Nothing masterful about that interview. It was the interviewee that voluntarily gave them ALL the information that was required. It is obvious the two interviewers believed what was being stated to them IMO, so that is what you are calling 'masterful'.
 
<modsnip - quoted post was removed>

LEGAL AID VICTORIA Legal information about Victims of crime Financial assistance and compensation​


Victims of crime may be able to get financial assistance from the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, or compensation from the person who committed the crime.
To apply for financial assistance you must be a victim of a violent crime that caused injury or loss. An injury may be physical or psychological. You must be able to show the link between the crime and your injury.

The crime must have:

  • been reported to police within a reasonable time – the police do not need to arrest anyone, or lay any charges, but the tribunal must be satisfied that a crime has taken place
  • occurred within the last two years (except in the case of certain childhood sexual crimes), although it may be possible to gain an extension of time from the tribunal if you have a good reason for the delay.

What assistance is available​

The tribunal may help you with a range of expenses including counselling, medical, safety-related, and funeral expenses. You may also get a payment to cover lost earnings and other reasonable expenses to help your recovery.

The amount of money you can get also depends on whether you are:

  • the person injured in the crime
  • someone who witnessed a crime, or is a parent of a child victim
  • a relative or dependant of someone who has died because of the crime.
See the tribunal’s website for the types of financial assistance available.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
www.theage.com.au

Greg Lynn and trying to pull a rabbit from a legal hat

The defence thought it would win and chose not to push for a new trial. To now say it was a miscarriage of justice is a little like getting a free kick, playing on, hitting the post and then asking for another shot.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au

July 26 2024 Article by John Silvester.

Behind a paywall, I think. Posting it here for those who subscribe.
 
TootsieFootsie said:
www.theage.com.au

Greg Lynn and trying to pull a rabbit from a legal hat

The defence thought it would win and chose not to push for a new trial. To now say it was a miscarriage of justice is a little like getting a free kick, playing on, hitting the post and then asking for another shot.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au

July 26 2024 Article by John Silvester.

Behind a paywall, I think. Posting it here for those who subscribe.
Click to expand...

Well, that clarifies what happened when Dann broached the bail issue.
Croucher basically told him to not even go there, that the chance of bail is as remote as Croucher winning the Stawell Gift.

(paraphrased from your linked article)

The Stawell Gift is Australia's oldest and richest short-distance running race. Link
 
changintimes said:
Nothing masterful about that interview. It was the interviewee that voluntarily gave them ALL the information that was required. It is obvious the two interviewers believed what was being stated to them IMO, so that is what you are calling 'masterful'.
Click to expand...
what makes you so sure that they believed what was being stated to them?

IMO they didn’t believe a word of it, he thought he was gaming them, narcs think they are smarter than detectives who have dealt with all manner of slimy lying characters. their ability to discern truth from fiction is far better than GLs pantomime performance.
 
John Silvester (in the latest article that Tootsie linked) said it seems obvious how the jury came to their decisions.

The jury asked for Lynn's testimony and the ballistic expert's evidence.
They overlayed the two to test Lynn's version of events.
And John Sylvester feels that the jury then found Lynn's story wildly improbable, leaving the prosecution's case the version that remained. Guilty.

(paraphrased from The Age article) - it is a good, descriptive article. I wish everyone could read it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 170 more.
Total: 543 (members: 171, guests: 372)

Online statistics

Members online
171
Guests online
372
Total visitors
543
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,300
Messages
18,252,304
Members
234,604
Latest member
OTHAFADannielle
Back
Top