Australia - Russell Hill & Carol Clay Murdered While Camping - Wonnangatta Valley, 2020 #7

[Doesitmakesense]

My very brief summary:

GL murdered Russell firstly, then Carol.
Efficiently in quick succession 2-3 minutes maybe 1 minute
He spent 1-2 hours planning murders after agitation from drone or camping spot argument.
Post mortem went to work to cover up I SO seriously cannot believe that this was the first time he moved and disposed of bodies. He did bloody well covering the initial crime scene up and going back and forth.

I have not seen 1 report of him panicking or acting irrationally after a double homicide.

Everything seems completely controlled, calculated, efficient with magnificent efforts to cover up.

Where is the trailer?

GL is so full of sh$t IMO.

Fall on your sword you loser.

I agree I think he stalked and hunted RH first, the went for CC when she went to find where RH went IMO

 

[Eaglette]

I agree I think he stalked and hunted RH first, the went for CC when she went to find where RH went IMO

Yep or even killed them in their sleeping bags.

 

[JudgeJudi]

For an example of eliminating the impossible: the possibility that they ran off together (leaving their truck and ID behind), and started a new life, eventually becomes impossible: given their characters, health, circumstances, previous behaviour, lack of any trace or evidence of planning it, and the passage of a long period of time and widespread publicity that everyone is upset/looking for them...

The police were stumped as to whether they simply got lost, met with foul play or even ran off to start a new life together, but they then found her car was still parked at her Pakenham residence.

Altho they were satified, I think they wanted the smoking gun: forensic evidence. They invested enormous resources into listened to him for months, if they had found solid proof, they wouldn't have wasted so much manpower on that. But they couldn't wait any longer, and fortunately, appear to have gotten the evidence they needed, after arrest.

Agreed. They listened to him for 11 months, but IMO were also using that time to continue searching for the trailer, missing phones and drone. They couldn't wait any longer to arrest him because while listening to him in his car they grew concerned he may take his own life.

What I can't get over is, why GL left RH's phone on? Thank goodness he made that mistake.

He probably forgot to turn the phone off in his haste to leave the valley. It was so fortunate that the security camera snapped 4 pictures of his car towing a trailer at 9:48am and RH's phone connected to a nearby phone tower at Hotham Heights 10 seconds earlier. I can't see how the defence will get around that. That will go down really well with a jury IMO.

 

[Bats]

MOO
It doesn't seem to me that GL is pleading not guilty because he had zero to do with CC and RH's deaths. He's pleaded not guilty to intentionally killing them.
Therefore, a jury may be put in an interesting situation where they'll know it must be either an accident/self defence or it was murder.
It will have to be either one or the other and can't be none nor both.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

He has pleaded not guilty to murder and his defence seems to have admitted he had something to do with their deaths.

The defence must know that the police have at least something on him, or enough to know that he had something to do with their deaths, otherwise why admit to anything at all.

I had a pang in my heart this morning, thinking of the terror that Russell and Carol went through

 

[Bats]

I wonder, would GL possibly plead guilty to manslaughter of at least one of them if that was an option to him? Though the prosecution haven't given him that option since the charges are for murder.

 

[Puggo]

I wonder, would GL possibly plead guilty to manslaughter of at least one of them if that was an option to him? Though the prosecution haven't given him that option since the charges are for murder.

That's basically what occurs when a defendant successfully establishes the partial defence of self defence. In Victoria, the Murder charge becomes a Manslaughter charge being tried.

(Interestingly the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) has a specific sentencing provision for firearm manslaughter.)

The argument then revolves on the whether the force used for self defence reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances?

Could he have simply left?

The only person who is placing the one established firearm present at the site in RHs possession is GL himself. There is no firearm evidence we know of with RHs prints on it to corroborate what he is arguing.

IMO *even* if what he is arguing is considered plausible, he and he alone has allegedly destroyed/concealed any evidence other than his own word that could support his alleged version of events.

JMO

 

[Bats]

That's basically what occurs when a defendant successfully establishes the partial defence of self defence. In Victoria, the Murder charge becomes a Manslaughter charge being tried.

(Interestingly the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) has a specific sentencing provision for firearm manslaughter.)

The argument then revolves on the whether the force used for self defence reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances?

Could he have simply left?

The only person who is placing the one established firearm present at the site in RHs possession is GL himself. There is no firearm evidence we know of with RHs prints on it to corroborate what he is arguing.

IMO *even* if what he is arguing is considered plausible, he and he alone has allegedly destroyed/concealed any evidence other than his own word that could support his alleged version of events.

JMO

Agreed Puggo!
So it will be up to the Prosecution to annihilate his 'word' describing the moments leading up to their deaths.
Even though i have no idea how they will do this i have no doubt they will be able to.

 

[JudgeJudi]

In a summary of some of the evidence, police claimed the circumstances of the deaths and his behaviour afterwards were consistent with him having intended to kill them, or at least cause really serious injury.

“There are several different manslaughter offences in Victoria. Manslaughter is also available as an alternative verdict when a person is charged with murder but cannot be found guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

Voluntary manslaughter
Voluntary manslaughter is the intentional killing of a person where mitigating factors are present. An example of this is where a fatal assault is committed in circumstances amounting to provocation, meaning that voluntary manslaughter, rather than murder, is the appropriate verdict.
Maximum sentence 25 years.

Involuntary manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a person without intent to kill ... For a court to find a person guilty of involuntary manslaughter, it must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the death was the result of an illegal act, an omission, an act of neglect or a failure to take reasonable care.

If manslaughter is committed in circumstances of gross violence, the court must impose a sentence with a non-parole period of ten years”.

Defences are outlined in the article.

Manslaughter (Vic)

I doubt self-defence would fly as he can’t prove what happened.

 

[Bats]

I doubt self-defence would fly as he can’t prove what happened.

Agreed! ..though, its up to the prosecution to show it wasn't self-defence. He doesn't need to prove it was.

 

[bearbear]

im hoping they were shot while they were sleeping in their tent, not aware of the horror and no pain,
that would make good sense if you wanted to kill someone, keep the area contained then burn with a fierce fire to destroy dna, was he waiting nearby for them to go to bed, planning, seething about the drone or whatever,
was rh stabbed in the tent while cc was in the nearby toilet and then he shot her by the vehicle on her way back?
in that scenario i wonder if he took the bodies away first, dragged them out in sleeping bags, hid them in his trailer then set the fire or came back later? it was a contained fire so i doubt he would have left it to burn?

 

[Cedars]

Therefore, a jury may be put in an interesting situation where they'll know it must be either an accident/self defence or it was murder.
It will have to be either one or the other and can't be none nor both.

I asked this question before but no one answered.

Can a jury in Victoria choose to find the defendent not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter?

Not all juries are allowed to do that. In many jurisdictions, juries can only find the defendent guilty or not guilty of the charge(s) they are facing, eg murder.

Would love a definitive answer...

 

[Cedars]

I asked this question before but no one answered.

Can a jury in Victoria choose to find the defendent not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter?

Not all juries are allowed to do that. In many jurisdictions, juries can only find the defendent guilty or not guilty of the charge(s) they are facing, eg murder.

Would love a definitive answer...

Okay, I answered my own question: yes the jury can reach a verdict of a lesser charge of, for example manslaughter, even though the crown prosecutor has laid a charge of murder. Murder Trial In The Supreme Court | Dribbin & Brown Criminal Lawyers

This is different from what I'm used to. IMO it means the prosecution can pursue a somewhat weak case of murder with intent, since if they lose that, they're confident they can at least get manslaughter.

Whereas, in Canada, prosecutors will not proceed with a weak premeditated murder case, as they might lose it and the killer will go free. They will downgrade the charges to what's called 2nd degree murder, a step above manslaughter, murder without intent.

I also think there's very little reason for prosecutors to make a deal in exchange for a guilty plea. The defense strategy will likely be to admit guilt, to keep the jury onside with them, but undermine the crown's allegations of intent, as was done in the case at the link.

JMO

 

[JudgeJudi]

To rely upon self-defence there must be evidence of an unjustified threat or use of force against an accused.

The Defence of Self Defence | Dribbin & Brown Criminal Lawyers | Victoria

 

[JudgeJudi]

On one of the old threads there was a discussion about an image of the burnt campsite not showing the blue tarp. Eureka! I just found I’d saved a screenshot of it in my Pictures. Just copy and paste the following in the YT search bar and go to 12:09.

Major breakthrough could solve Australia's most baffling mystery | 60 Minutes Australia

 

[Sher Lock]

On one of the old threads there was a discussion about an image of the burnt campsite not showing the blue tarp. Eureka! I just found I’d saved a screenshot of it in my Pictures. Just copy and paste the following in the YT search bar and go to 12:09.

Major breakthrough could solve Australia's most baffling mystery | 60 Minutes Australia

View attachment 400878

Great find Judge Judi. You can actually see the guide ropes for the tent in this pic. I'm pretty sure the blue tarp was used to cover the burnt out tent etc to preserve it further whilst they were still investigating the situation. In other pics you can see the blue tarp and rocks which I think would have been used to hold the tarp down. That's my take on it at this stage.

 

[Motomike]

Great find Judge Judi. You can actually see the guide ropes for the tent in this pic. I'm pretty sure the blue tarp was used to cover the burnt out tent etc to preserve it further whilst they were still investigating the situation. In other pics you can see the blue tarp and rocks which I think would have been used to hold the tarp down. That's my take on it at this stage.

I think the blue tarp would have been used to lay out the tent contents as they investigated the scene.

 

[Bats]

Accused campsite killer Greg Lynn could face trial in October

Former airline pilot denies murdering Russell Hill, 74, and Carol Clay, 73, in March 2020

www.google.com

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Accused campsite killer Greg Lynn could face trial in October

Former airline pilot denies murdering Russell Hill, 74, and Carol Clay, 73, in March 2020

www.theguardian.com

Last month Lynn was committed to stand trial in Victoria’s supreme court. He faced the court for a directions hearing on Thursday.

The judicial registrar Tim Freeman said it was possible the court could accommodate a six- to eight-week trial beginning at the start of October, with a view to the matter being completed before Christmas.

But Lynn’s lawyer, Dermot Dann KC, estimated the trial could stretch for six months should the prosecution rely on playing the vast amount of recordings it had covertly made of Lynn during the police investigation.

The prosecutor, John Dickie, said police would only rely on a relatively small number of recordings. When Freeman asked whether he was optimistic that six months would not be needed for the trial, he replied: “I’m always optimistic, your honour.”

The court heard on Thursday that the prosecution and Lynn both wanted the trial to proceed in Melbourne, despite the court typically opting to hold trials as close as possible to where the alleged offending occurred.

Dann said he would make pre-trial applications relating to the case, which he said could mean the prosecution had to present a “radically different” case to that relied upon at committal.

Lynn will return to court on 11 May for a further directions hearing.

 

[SouthAussie]

Also stated at this morning's hearing, as per this article from The Age ....

(Paraphrased) Prosecutor John Dickie said that the police were going to return to the High Country for the “potential retrieval of phones".
Prosecutor Dickie said that this search should not affect the prosecution's case against GL.

Accused High Country killer Gregory Lynn could face trial as early as October

The 56-year-old former airline pilot faced the Supreme Court for the first time on Thursday after a magistrate committed him to stand trial last month.

www.theage.com.au