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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
www.abc.net.au

Judge rules out manslaughter option in alleged killer Greg Lynn's murder trial

Judge Michael Crouch tells the jury that the only charges to be considered are the alleged murders of two Victorian campers, Carol Clay and Russell Hill.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

Jurors in the trial of alleged killer Greg Lynn have been told they cannot find the former Jetstar pilot guilty of manslaughter.

The alternative charge of manslaughter had been mentioned to jurors at the outset of the weeks-long double murder trial.

But as Justice Michael Croucher's summing-up of the case began in the Supreme Court of Victoria on Thursday, he told jurors the circumstances of the case meant that if they were not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the murder charges, "any verdict of manslaughter in the alternative would be wrong".

"The only charges before you are murder, and it's for you to determine whether Mr Lynn is guilty or not guilty in relation to [Russell] Hill and whether Mr Lynn is guilty or not guilty in relation to [Carol] Clay," the judge said.
 
Last edited:
Kemug said:
And remember, at that point he had no idea that they weren't a long-married couple.
Click to expand...
The fact that R.H & C.C. were camping together, unknown to his wife & family came out in the media long before G.L. was brought in. He would have been well aware of media accounts of missing couple. In ROI, he did say "they may have been trying to have fun" in what I picked up as sarcastic, or arrogant when originally listening to ROI being played in court.Itwas one of those moments that stood apart... I thought to myself "no love lost there". JMO
 
Skyboy90 said:
Guilty in my book. But I have a feeling he will be acquitted.
Click to expand...
I haven't got a single doubt he is guilty but it is going to come down to whether the white noise from Lynn's nonsensical account of what he claims took place is enough to put reasonable doubt in the jury's minds. I just can't see them falling for it. So a fairly quickfire guilty verdict is my prediction.
 
Skyboy90 said:
So no Manslaughter charge. Murder or Acquitted.

Obviously some other charges, but time served I assume will cover that, plus fines.

Guilty in my book. But I have a feeling he will be acquitted.
Click to expand...
D.D. has said Lynn pleads guilty to destruction of evidence.It is now up to the jury to use rational human logic.However if he does per chance walk.. he will still have lost everything he held so dear , that forced him to obliterate the evidence.I feel for the victims families,if this is the case.
 

This is massive:

Justice Croucher told jurors at the start of the trial that manslaughter was open as an alternative charge to murder.

“Before I embark on the greater detail, it’s necessary to inform you of this ... manslaughter will no longer be available to you as an alternative charge,” he said.

“I as well as counsel agree if you are not satisfied of murder, there will be no basis for an alternative verdict of manslaughter.

“Accordingly, you must put manslaughter out of your minds. The only charges before you are murder.”

And this - especially. Since the prosecution's case relied on Lynns actions after the fact as evidence of his guilt (of murder)

Justice Croucher said jurors would need to put aside their sympathy and morals and view the evidence as objective judges of the facts.

“This is not about Mr Lynn doing a terrible thing by destroying the bodies,” he said.

“Any personal feelings of sympathy or bias … must be put out of your minds as you consider this case.”
 
Spectrix said:

This is massive:

Justice Croucher told jurors at the start of the trial that manslaughter was open as an alternative charge to murder.

“Before I embark on the greater detail, it’s necessary to inform you of this ... manslaughter will no longer be available to you as an alternative charge,” he said.

“I as well as counsel agree if you are not satisfied of murder, there will be no basis for an alternative verdict of manslaughter.

“Accordingly, you must put manslaughter out of your minds. The only charges before you are murder.”

And this - especially. Since the prosecution's case relied on Lynns actions after the fact as evidence of his guilt (of murder)

Justice Croucher said jurors would need to put aside their sympathy and morals and view the evidence as objective judges of the facts.

“This is not about Mr Lynn doing a terrible thing by destroying the bodies,” he said.

“Any personal feelings of sympathy or bias … must be put out of your minds as you consider this case.”
Click to expand...
Not sure why Justice Croucher has seen fit to remove 'manslaughter' when he said earlier it was in play?

At times jurors are tempted to opt for a guilty verdict to a lesser charge. So with manslaughter removed, assuming the jury head down the guilty path, Lynn will get the full 'holiday' not the shortened one.
 
Hi All, newly registered user, but have been following this forum and case for some time.

Wondering whether anyone has picked up whether GL was ever challenged on the lack of evidence of RH's death at the location he specified (GL's camp)?

To me this is an obvious line of questioning the prosecution should have pursued during GL's testimony which could have settled whether GL's account could be true.
GL claims he set fire to RH/CC's campsite to get rid of the evidence after CC's death (i.e. burnt the blood evidence). But as far as I'm aware, the police found no evidence to support GL's account of RH falling on his knife after pursuing him back to his camp. GL did state that there was a lot of blood over both bodies, so surely that would have been visible and requiring concealment at his camp site. But he didn't set fire to his own camp. Perhaps the police never checked and hence couldn't challenge GL's account?

I've been surprised at how much focus the prosecution made on the circumstances around CC's death but how little they delved into the circumstances around RH's death.
 
SnEHnESnE said:
Hi All, newly registered user, but have been following this forum and case for some time.

Wondering whether anyone has picked up whether GL was ever challenged on the lack of evidence of RH's death at the location he specified (GL's camp)?

To me this is an obvious line of questioning the prosecution should have pursued during GL's testimony which could have settled whether GL's account could be true.
GL claims he set fire to RH/CC's campsite to get rid of the evidence after CC's death (i.e. burnt the blood evidence). But as far as I'm aware, the police found no evidence to support GL's account of RH falling on his knife after pursuing him back to his camp. GL did state that there was a lot of blood over both bodies, so surely that would have been visible and requiring concealment at his camp site. But he didn't set fire to his own camp. Perhaps the police never checked and hence couldn't challenge GL's account?

I've been surprised at how much focus the prosecution made on the circumstances around CC's death but how little they delved into the circumstances around RH's death.
Click to expand...
I don't recall mention of what might or might not have been found at GL's site either. But what if there was blood over there? I suspect there would have been blood there regardless of whether he murdered them or it was self defence.

It seems, and GL claims too, that the deaths occurred on the other site. The knife remains a bit of a mystery though. Pretty sure GL claims he burnt it but I would have thought the blade might have been found somewhere if that was the case? There probably wasn't even a knife involved.
 
Last edited:
Spectrix said:

This is massive:

Justice Croucher told jurors at the start of the trial that manslaughter was open as an alternative charge to murder.

“Before I embark on the greater detail, it’s necessary to inform you of this ... manslaughter will no longer be available to you as an alternative charge,” he said.

“I as well as counsel agree if you are not satisfied of murder, there will be no basis for an alternative verdict of manslaughter.

“Accordingly, you must put manslaughter out of your minds. The only charges before you are murder.”

And this - especially. Since the prosecution's case relied on Lynns actions after the fact as evidence of his guilt (of murder)

Justice Croucher said jurors would need to put aside their sympathy and morals and view the evidence as objective judges of the facts.

“This is not about Mr Lynn doing a terrible thing by destroying the bodies,” he said.

“Any personal feelings of sympathy or bias … must be put out of your minds as you consider this case.”
Click to expand...

I now have doubts about Croucher's ability. How can he say that manslaughter is an alternative verdict and then reverse himself?

Brief bio:

"The Hon Justice Michael Croucher KC. Amazingly, His Honour dropped out of school in year 10, at the ripe old age of 15, to pursue his dream of becoming a professional motocross rider. Fortunately for us that didn’t work out and he made his way to the law, ultimately becoming a Victorian Supreme Court Justice."

www.greenslist.com.au

the hon justice michael croucher kc

This week we welcome The Hon Justice Michael Croucher KC. Amazingly, His Honour dropped out of school in year 10, at the ripe old age of 15, to pursue his dream of becoming a professional motocross ri
www.greenslist.com.au www.greenslist.com.au
 
Cliff Hardy said:
Not sure why Justice Croucher has seen fit to remove 'manslaughter' when he said earlier it was in play?

At times jurors are tempted to opt for a guilty verdict to a lesser charge. So with manslaughter removed, assuming the jury head down the guilty path, Lynn will get the full 'holiday' not the shortened one.
Click to expand...

I expect that its because the prosecution's allegation is that Lynn committed murder, not manslaughter. It's possible the defence asked for the option to be included initially but now having heard both arguments, it's clear that manslaughter is not on the table for either defence or prosecution.
 
JBowie said:
I now have doubts about Croucher's ability. How can he say that manslaughter is an alternative verdict and then reverse himself?

Brief bio:

"The Hon Justice Michael Croucher KC. Amazingly, His Honour dropped out of school in year 10, at the ripe old age of 15, to pursue his dream of becoming a professional motocross rider. Fortunately for us that didn’t work out and he made his way to the law, ultimately becoming a Victorian Supreme Court Justice."

www.greenslist.com.au

the hon justice michael croucher kc

This week we welcome The Hon Justice Michael Croucher KC. Amazingly, His Honour dropped out of school in year 10, at the ripe old age of 15, to pursue his dream of becoming a professional motocross ri
www.greenslist.com.au www.greenslist.com.au
Click to expand...

Errrr.. so you don't become a high court judge without having ability.;)....I'm sure your comment was in jest!
 
Bats said:
I expect that its because the prosecution's allegation is that Lynn committed murder, not manslaughter. It's possible the defence asked for the option to be included initially but now having heard both arguments, it's clear that manslaughter is not on the table for either defence or prosecution.
Click to expand...
You may be on to something there because, on reflection, I struggle to see how anyone could actually find manslaughter in this case. The type of evidence that might support such a finding just isn't present. This one is murder or it isn't and that's what the judge appears to be implying.
 
I've got a lot of catching up to do, but this is from the podcast.

The Defendant Takes the Stand
Evidence in chief

He said he heard RH take his shotgun out of the car in the dark. It was dark between 9 and 10pm when the confrontations unfolded.

He had a torch but didn’t have one with him when the struggle took place or when he returned to his car later. He did have a torch when he was cleaning up the scene. RH’s camp was well illuminated but he still had a torch with him.

Bits and pieces were found around the campsite. There was blood spatter on the hitching rails and the tray base of the Toyota, some on the inside of the canopy and he wiped all that off. There was nothing on the passenger door or forward of the passenger door. It was all after where CC was. Solar panels were leaning against the rear left wheel of the Toyota when this happened. They had quite a lot of blood and other material on them and over the camp furniture which was in front of the tent. Some of it had been knocked over. Some of those pieces were covered in a lot of tissue and blood and there was a very large pool of blood on the ground in between the Toyota and the tent where CC was.
GL had blood on his clothes.

He brought a rifle and a shotgun on the trip. The shotgun had been used for thick forest where it would be darker and he’d only be aiming for 20-30 metres for a deer. He also used a laser site because the environment is darker and it was quite useful. It threw out a laser beam and showed where a solid slug would fly through the air. He reasoned that in the struggle over the gun, the shot had gone through the side mirror of the car, and that if someone had shot CC with the laser site on, the laser would have illuminated the mirror and not her. He destroyed the mirror when cleaning the camp and burning the campsite.

The evening after the deaths, after destroying evidence and moving the bodies, he stayed at a campsite called The Pines near Jamieson on his drive home. Here he burned the RH’s drone, keys and kitchen knife he said caused RH’s death. He threw the phones in the Rose River as he wanted to erase all his involvement in what had happened as they might have had photographs of him or his vehicle.

He denies having any intention to hurt or kill RH or CC. During his struggles with RH, his intention was trying to get the shotgun from him the first time and trying to defend himself the second time. He burned his bloody clothes.

Link
 
www.brisbanetimes.com.au

Lynn’s account of campsite deaths is ‘complete fiction’, prosecutor tells jury

The lead prosecutor has urged a Supreme Court jury to reject Gregory Lynn’s version of events over the deaths of Russell Hill and Carol Clay at a campsite in 2020.
www.brisbanetimes.com.au www.brisbanetimes.com.au

With very loud music playing GL was supposed to have been alerted to Russell taking the gun from Gls car, by the sound of a drink bottle being knocked over. :rolleyes:

Behind a paywall, I think. Posting it here for those who subscribe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 320 more.
Total: 2,638 (members: 321, guests: 2,317)

Online statistics

Members online
321
Guests online
2,317
Total visitors
2,638
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
597,753
Messages
18,070,645
Members
230,453
Latest member
LettyTil
Back
Top