Found Deceased Australia - Russell Hill, 74, & Carol Clay, 72, Wonnangatta Valley, 20 Mar 2020 #5 *charges*

[Motomike]

Thank you to all the super sleuths out there for your good wishes. We (the camping group) have long held the belief that we would never see Russell again. So todays news is a bit of a double edged sword. If the remains are infact those of Russell and Carol (we don't really know yet but the chances are very likely that they are) at least we have closure, but it also means that the last glimmer of hope has been extinguished.

 

[JBowie]

Just throwing it out there. Lets say the bodies have decomposed and there is no clear cause of death and the trailer is found but has no dna to prove rh & cc were ever in the trailer or 4wd. On this basis GL walks from a murder charge. Perhaps charging him with murder gives LE the chance to negotiate a guilty plea for manslaughter. If I were GL and had not already confessed and had disposed of the trailer never to be seen again and was confident a cause of death could not be linked then a plea of not guilty to murder and the very real likelihood of non conviction is better than spending the next 15 years in a cell. I am still confident GL gave a no comment interview. It doesn't take 3 days to tell someone what happened over 6 hours.

How long it takes depends on whether the accused person is co-operating or stonewalling from the outset.

Sometimes it can take many hours and a tag team of detectives to break down the resistance of an uncooperative person -- if they do manage to at all.

If police put a swag of incriminating evidence on the table then it's hard for other than career crims to keep denying any part in a crime and simply refusing to comment.

I think it's been suggested above that the accused told police where to locate the bodies. If true, then he may have only done so at the end of a long and grueling interrogation.

 

[dalsglen]

Thank you to all the super sleuths out there for your good wishes. We (the camping group) have long held the belief that we would never see Russell again. So todays news is a bit of a double edged sword. If the remains are infact those of Russell and Carol (we don't really know yet but the chances are very likely that they are) at least we have closure, but it also means that the last glimmer of hope has been extinguished.

I'm so sorry motomike

 

[Bats]

I have really mixed emotions now that some human remains have been found!

I am not sure GL has been "co-operative" and led Police directly to the site of the bodies... though perhaps indirectly he has. The questioning process took a very long time...perhaps just long enough for the LE to check out the GPS from his car that was impounded.

Perhaps GL's GPS led them directly to a place that needed to be searched....though they already had what they needed anyway

IMO .. the bodies of CC and RH and the trailer were not required ...
... the LE already had enough to charge the accused for murder ... even without this information.... enough to probably convince a jury...

...I think the shovels found around Mt Hotham was just a set up... the search lasted a single day! Also, given how "closed book" this investigation has been one has to wonder why it was important to tell the media that they are going to search a particular area for something...find something...then....end the search...

Its been an amazing case to follow and has been interesting to investigate the investigators here on WS

#Motormike, I really feel for you here. Your insight is really interesting and I hope this development is getting you close to some sort of closure.

#edit mixed grammer

 

[they'll get you]

Now where is the trailer??

Allegedly sold on Gumtree March to July last year.

This will likely add a big piece to the jigsaw IMO.

I once needed to contact the seller of an item I purchased on Gumtree.
I searched my Gumtree messages, my emails, Phone and PayPal. I found her on my phone when we were communicating the address and and time for pick up.
They’ll find it for sure if they haven’t already.

 

[Sher Lock]

The day has finally come when Russell & Carol can now be brought home and laid to rest peacefully.

Motomike, I'm so sorry you lost a long term friend in the most horrendous circumstances. I hope you and his family & friends (and Carols) are doing ok. This can't have been an easy 20 months for any of you.

RIP Russell & Carol

 

[they'll get you]

He may have had a coat of paint put onto the trailer for sale. All DNA covered and gone?

 

[they'll get you]

At about the 1.48 mark the comment is "His information has led them to..." I am guessing this is an assumption. Not hearing anything else that has come out of the interview.

Imo he’s fessed up and told LE the pinpoint exact location.

No one else ever stubbled across them, yeah he’s told them exactly where.
They know they have the murderer & he’s where he belongs until May.
The *advertiser censored* thought he was home and hosed.
He can’t fly out now can he.

 

[sapphire blue]

Just throwing it out there. Lets say the bodies have decomposed and there is no clear cause of death and the trailer is found but has no dna to prove rh & cc were ever in the trailer or 4wd. On this basis GL walks from a murder charge. Perhaps charging him with murder gives LE the chance to negotiate a guilty plea for manslaughter. If I were GL and had not already confessed and had disposed of the trailer never to be seen again and was confident a cause of death could not be linked then a plea of not guilty to murder and the very real likelihood of non conviction is better than spending the next 15 years in a cell. I am still confident GL gave a no comment interview. It doesn't take 3 days to tell someone what happened over 6 hours.

they don’t start with a murder charge. if they didn’t have enough to prove murder they would have charged him with manslaughter to begin with as it is easier to prove manslaughter than it is to prove murder.

 

[JBowie]

they don’t start with a murder charge. if they didn’t have enough to prove murder they would have charged him with manslaughter to begin with as it is easier to prove manslaughter than it is to prove murder.

Murder & Manslaughter Defence Lawyers Victoria | Sher Criminal Lawyers

A jury can find a person charged with murder guilty of manslaughter if they cannot be sure of a murder verdict beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[OEJ]

I've been following this for awhile, and it looks like it may soon be over with the finding of human remains. I do think the pilot told them where to look. Now, I just want to know why he did something so terrible. I find it hard to believe it was a fight over a camp spot. I guess we'll find out, eventually.

 

[Detective Willy]

At about the 1.48 mark the comment is "His information has led them to..." I am guessing this is an assumption. Not hearing anything else that has come out of the interview.

Thanks so much DRT they are literally saying GL told them where the bodies are so must there must have been a confession. Now they will likely to try to get the charges downgraded to Manslaughter?

We need only cast our minds back to Borce Ristevski and the way he was able to get away with this. Poor Karen.

Reading this link, there is something similar that Police said in the conference"

"Because of the complex nature of these matters, trials can sometimes take months or even years".

Murder & Manslaughter Defence Lawyers Victoria | Sher Criminal Lawyers (sherlawyers.com.au)

The legal eagles likely to argue if this is Murder or Manslaughter now based on what evidence is obtained by forensics IMO..

 

[Arboreal]

they don’t start with a murder charge. if they didn’t have enough to prove murder they would have charged him with manslaughter to begin with as it is easier to prove manslaughter than it is to prove murder.

The police in Australia lay charges based on the evidence they see; and I suspect in this case they believe the evidence they have establishes the elements of the crime, which include that the person acted in such a way that they their action caused the death and that they acted with mens rea - a guilty mind necessary for murder to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, the prosecution service can substitute new charges for those initially laid, if the evidence justifies it; and then the jury can acquit of one charge, say murder, abut convict of manslaughter. However, both charges attract similar sentences in actual time served.
There is also the possibility of yet more charges, such as those connected with disposing of a corpse.
I read that Mr Lynn had retained as legal counsel the same lawyer who represented Pusey - the Porsche driver who speeding led to a police stop that created the circumstances for an accident in which four police officers were killed. You know the one who filmed the dying officers and berated them for spoiling his sushi.

 

[Satchie]

Who could have imagined that Russell and Carol's disappearance during an innocuous camping trip could end up this way? No wonder family and friends are reeling. It's a truly unbelievable nightmare. Although we speculate and encounter these things in the news and on this site, it still turns the world upside down.

It was just pure bad luck that they encountered someone so willing to destroy other people's lives for the sake of ...what? His freedom? His desire not to be bothered by other humans? I hope he has not felt free for a single moment since that night, and that he never feels it again.

 

[Arboreal]

Perhaps someone has noted this already, but the ABC reported that "Five unmarked police cars were seen travelling to the remote search site early on Tuesday".
Although not explicitly made, the suggestion seems to be that Mr Lynn may have pointed out the exact location.
Another observation that folks have made, is that police are speaking of "human remains". They are sifting the soil and there is a clip I saw in which the camera microphone caught one of the search team telling another one to be on the look out for bone.
Depending what the soil chemistry is like (i.e. the actual chemicals and amount of oxygen) and the microbes, sometimes bodies are well preserved and can be for thousands of years. In other soils, bodies decompose very quickly. You are then looking for teeth, dentures, and things like artificial hips or knees or plates used to men broken legs and arms and which also detects buttons, zippers, jeans rivets etc. Hence the person waving around a metal detector (wrongly identified as a ground penetrating radar - see photos)

Ground penetrating radar.

Metal detector

 

[Arboreal]

Thank you to all the super sleuths out there for your good wishes. We (the camping group) have long held the belief that we would never see Russell again. So todays news is a bit of a double edged sword. If the remains are infact those of Russell and Carol (we don't really know yet but the chances are very likely that they are) at least we have closure, but it also means that the last glimmer of hope has been extinguished.

Motomike,
These sorts of crimes are incomprehensible, I think partly, because we do in Australia live if a very safe country, by world standards. I for one feel so sad for the families and friends of the victims and hope those affected can find some peace now that the police have done such a magnificent job.
I wanted to thank you for answering our questions and being here.

 

[SouthAussie]

Police will resume the hunt for evidence on Wednesday after wrapping up efforts on Tuesday evening.

The meticulous search involves detectives putting dirt through a sifter in order to detect any potential bone fragments.

Search for camper clues continue after remains found

 

[Arboreal]

No I just mean in general that if some random person were to murder some other random person, but they really believed (or hoped) enough time has passed that the coppers wouldn’t be able to tell how they died, then that someone might be more willing to tell them where the body is, thinking they’d get a manslaughter instead of murder charge. Hypothetically. Not saying that’s what happened here, I’m just trying to be careful because of the rules now that were said the other day. Sorry if it sounded too vague.

To get a conviction for murder or manslaughter the Crown does not need a body or to identify exactly how the person died, only that the person did die by the hand of another person and that that other person's action was deliberate and not the result of some defect of mind (i.e. they were insane, delusional, talking to God and so on). There is a complex and quite fascinating body of law around all this. Typically, the Crown will set out to establish certain facts of the case ( a person is actually dead and the death was "unnatural"), and oftentimes the defence will actually agree to some of those facts. The argument then focuses on the accused's involvement (e.g. the possibility of the crime - Cardinal Pell; or I didn't kill them; I disposed of the bodies...; I was cleaning my rifle and I did not know it was loaded and it went off shooting the victim and I panicked and disposed of the body...), state of mind and responsibility (e.g. My neighbour's dog told me to do it - Son of Sam) and the circumstances that led to the accused's actions (e.g. long standing antipathy, such as in neighbourhood disputes, provocation and so on). On some of these the burden of proof is on the defence, as in insanity pleas; on others, it is on the prosecution.
So, it will be the accused's account of events against the forensic evidence. Whether the Judge permits the accused's prior history or evidence of his behaviour to be admitted, is a matter of judicial discretion and in part will depend on the relevance to the case and whether it is more prejudicial than probative.
Unless the accused enters a plea of guilty, this trial is going to be really interesting as the only living witness is also the accused.

 

[Satchie]

Perhaps someone has noted this already, but the ABC reported that "Five unmarked police cars were seen travelling to the remote search site early on Tuesday".
Although not explicitly made, the suggestion seems to be that Mr Lynn may have pointed out the exact location.
Another observation that folks have made, is that police are speaking of "human remains". They are sifting the soil and there is a clip I saw in which the camera microphone caught one of the search team telling another one to be on the look out for bone.
Depending what the soil chemistry is like (i.e. the actual chemicals and amount of oxygen) and the microbes, sometimes bodies are well preserved and can be for thousands of years. In other soils, bodies decompose very quickly. You are then looking for teeth, dentures, and things like artificial hips or knees or plates used to men broken legs and arms. Hence the person waving around a metal detector (wrongly identified as a ground penetrating radar - see photos)

Ground penetrating radar.

Metal detector

What I get from analyzing the news sources is that AAP were invited onto the search site on Tues where they filmed/photographed one of several simultaneous searches (the images are all credited to AAP photographer, Jason Eamon, the video footage is not credited but is obviously all by one camera at the same scene).

At some point, AAP were told remains had been found. They broke the story about 3 pm Australia time, and all the other news agencies are based on that story (AAP is a wire service that shares stories rather than publishes themselves).

There can't have been any kind of press conference, or there would be footage of that.

The remains must have been found well before AAP were told, in order to ensure all the family members had been officially informed through police channels. Police don't want anyone involved to find out through the news media.

Therefore, I think the remains were found early in the morning, and that's what brought out the detectives in the unmarked police cars.

I believe they invited AAP into the area after remains were found, and brought them to a minor search area. Because no way do police want the media on site, taking photos, when actual victim's remains are found.

I really don't think anything can be deduced at this point from the news coverage. The reporters, IMO, don't know any more than we do. The police show what they want to show, they say what they can say, without jeapardizing the case by revealing anything to the suspect that might interfere with their interrogation, or prejudicing a potential jury, etc.

JMO

 

[SouthAussie]

This HS article says that the remains were found 5 hours after the excavator was brought in. The excavator was brought to them (by a local) on Tuesday ... no mention of what time on Tuesday.

The remains were found in a 'very shallow' area of bushland.

Detectives are looking for bones. They have not called in cadaver dogs.

Any remains may have been covered by 'lush growth' since March 2020.

No Cookies | Herald Sun