Australia - Russell Hill & Carol Clay Murdered While Camping - Wonnangatta Valley, 2020 #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
They started with 15 jurors and obviously only 12 ultimately vote on the verdict but what I didn't know until yesterday was how the Australian system works as far as trimming the jury down to 12.

In the US I believe they name the alternates and the alternates do not vote on the verdict unless they replace one of the designated 12 due to illness etc.

In Australia, when a trial begins with more than 12 jurors, the foreman, who is voted in at the commencement of the trial, is the only juror guaranteed to remain for the verdict vote. After the prosecution and defence sum up a ballot is conducted - basically balls with numbers are drawn out - and it is a lucky dip who remains and who goes home.
 
JudgeJudi said:
In a murder trial where a unanimous decision is required, IMO I'd consider half a day to be "little". Counsel really sweat on jury verdicts no matter how experienced they are.
Click to expand...

I just finished a book about serial killer, Ted Bundy. When he finally went to trial (in Florida) the judge had everyone working in the court up until midnight on some days, and on Saturdays .... moving the trial and verdict expeditiously along, with no regrets.

Sometimes I wish they'd put in a little overtime here (maybe not to the degree of the Bundy trials). It must be agonising for the families, and for the jury - never really being able to relax with such a huge decision on their minds.
 
SouthAussie said:
I just finished a book about serial killer, Ted Bundy. When he finally went to trial (in Florida) the judge had everyone working in the court up until midnight on some days, and on Saturdays .... moving the trial and verdict expeditiously along, with no regrets.

Sometimes I wish they'd put in a little overtime here (maybe not to the degree of the Bundy trials). It must be agonising for the families, and for the jury - never really being able to relax with such a huge decision on their minds.
Click to expand...
I always have a bit of a chuckle about court times & breaks ( I realise the court reporters need breaks ) . They always get their breaks & lunch etc. Very rarely will work back etc

I often work 10 -12rs with no breaks!!

I do remember at the siege inquest, that we had an evening session from 7 -11pm from memory to allow for expert witnesses from the UK, that was a huge deal at the time ( mainly security etc ) as the whole court building had to be open. Everyone planned a head & bought a plate for a meal!!
 
drsleuth said:
www.abc.net.au

Insults fly in the courtroom as Greg Lynn's double-murder trial nears its final chapter

It's murder or acquittal — after five weeks of evidence and arguments, the jury in Greg Lynn's murder trial over the deaths of two Victorian campers only have two options to choose from.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

Greg Lynn's lawyers channel Paul Keating in final pitch to Victorian campers murder trial jury​

Click to expand...

Not helpful, and just plain nasty. Showing everyone that his barrister can be as nasty as Lynn, and that is "okay"?
There was SO MUCH nastiness in this trial. About Russell and Carol, about the prosecutor, about the prosecution's witnesses.

imo


"Then the insults turned personal.

An expert from earlier in the trial, police scientist Mark Gellatly, was likened to gelati — not only because his name sounded similar to the Italian dessert, but due to "the way he melted in the witness box like an ice cream in the sun".

Mr Dann, who stood while addressing the jury from the bar table, looked at prosecutor Daniel Porceddu and called him "Inspector Clouseau", a reference to the bumbling detective from the Pink Panther series."

(from your link)
 
TootsieFootsie said:
ABC 5 hours ago, updated 24 minutes ago

www.abc.net.au

'One narrow path to unanimous' guilty verdicts in Greg Lynn trial, jurors told

Deliberations in the murder trial of Greg Lynn, accused of killing two Victorian campers, will begin next week.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

Jurors in the double murder trial of alleged camper killer Greg Lynn have been sent out to consider their verdicts.

But with the trial sitting for half a day on Friday — and not at all on weekends — the first full day of deliberations will not take place until next week.

Two reserve jurors — who were empanelled as a precaution in case of sickness or other issues — were discharged before the remaining 12 were sent to consider their verdicts.

"Take as little or as much time as you need," the judge said.

They were instructed on the four elements that comprise a charge of murder.

Those elements are:

  • A person's death was caused by an act performed by the accused
  • The act causing death was performed consciously, voluntarily and deliberately by the accused
  • The accused performed the act causing death intending to kill the other person or intending to cause that person at least really serious injury; and
  • The accused performed the act causing death while not acting in self defence
The 12 people in whose hands Mr Lynn's fate rests will consider whether those elements have been met from Monday.



Me>>> I wonder how much time they consider "little"
Click to expand...
Being on a jury of a murder trial is an awful experience. However the teamwork, meticulous attention to detail and judges advice helps greatly. We took forever, only because we considered everything, as we were told. Many people wondered why it took us so long. Could have easily said he was guilty in the first 2 hours. But we did our job well.
 
SouthAussie said:
Not helpful, and just plain nasty. Showing everyone that his barrister can be as nasty as Lynn, and that is "okay"?

imo


"Then the insults turned personal.

An expert from earlier in the trial, police scientist Mark Gellatly, was likened to gelati — not only because his name sounded similar to the Italian dessert, but due to "the way he melted in the witness box like an ice cream in the sun".

Mr Dann, who stood while addressing the jury from the bar table, looked at prosecutor Daniel Porceddu and called him "Inspector Clouseau", a reference to the bumbling detective from the Pink Panther series."

(from your link)
Click to expand...
I agree SA, seems unprofessional & desperate to me.

If I was on a jury, this kind of behaviour wouldn't impress me!

I assume the judge found this all ok??
 
JudgeJudi said:
In a murder trial where a unanimous decision is required, IMO I'd consider half a day to be "little". Counsel really sweat on jury verdicts no matter how experienced they are.
Click to expand...
If jury's follow the advice of the judge and consider all the evidence, it will definately take more than half a day. Then you start to question what is reasonable doubt. Go back into court to get something clarified, everyone thinking a decision has been made. Back to the little jury room! Tears, arguments, silence, and finally respect for the other 11 people in the room. Then a decision all have to live with forever.
 
Cliff Hardy said:
They started with 15 jurors and obviously only 12 ultimately vote on the verdict but what I didn't know until yesterday was how the Australian system works as far as trimming the jury down to 12.

In the US I believe they name the alternates and the alternates do not vote on the verdict unless they replace one of the designated 12 due to illness etc.

In Australia, when a trial begins with more than 12 jurors, the foreman, who is voted in at the commencement of the trial, is the only juror guaranteed to remain for the verdict vote. After the prosecution and defence sum up a ballot is conducted - basically balls with numbers are drawn out - and it is a lucky dip who remains and who goes home.
Click to expand...
No, not correct. The first 12 people empanelled are the jury. Those few extras are the ones to be dropped.
 
SouthAussie said:
Not helpful, and just plain nasty. Showing everyone that his barrister can be as nasty as Lynn, and that is "okay"?
There was SO MUCH nastiness in this trial. About Russell and Carol, about the prosecutor, about the prosecution's witnesses.

imo


"Then the insults turned personal.

An expert from earlier in the trial, police scientist Mark Gellatly, was likened to gelati — not only because his name sounded similar to the Italian dessert, but due to "the way he melted in the witness box like an ice cream in the sun".

Mr Dann, who stood while addressing the jury from the bar table, looked at prosecutor Daniel Porceddu and called him "Inspector Clouseau", a reference to the bumbling detective from the Pink Panther series."

(from your link)
Click to expand...
Mr Dann is not a nice Mann ;)
 
wallyworld said:
Mr Dann is not a nice Mann ;)
Click to expand...

Just fighting hard for his client, I think. Trying to portray everyone in a bad light, with puerile comments, to deflect from the disgusting way in which Russell's and Carol's remains were treated.

Having been around for a long time, I think Dann knew that the jury would be instructed to not take into consideration the horrible treatment of the remains, but how could that not linger (emotionally) in the back of their minds and not affect their opinions of Lynn?

imo
 
SouthAussie said:
Not helpful, and just plain nasty. Showing everyone that his barrister can be as nasty as Lynn, and that is "okay"?
There was SO MUCH nastiness in this trial. About Russell and Carol, about the prosecutor, about the prosecution's witnesses.

imo


"Then the insults turned personal.

An expert from earlier in the trial, police scientist Mark Gellatly, was likened to gelati — not only because his name sounded similar to the Italian dessert, but due to "the way he melted in the witness box like an ice cream in the sun".

Mr Dann, who stood while addressing the jury from the bar table, looked at prosecutor Daniel Porceddu and called him "Inspector Clouseau", a reference to the bumbling detective from the Pink Panther series."

(from your link)
Click to expand...
I always feel like when people have to rely on name calling and the like, it’s because they haven’t got a lot else to work with.. just like people in the comment section on social media, the folks with the most convincing & well thought out points are rarely the ones who resort to personal put downs etc. It never leaves a good impression on me & I hope the jury hasn’t been sucked into it either.
 
Last edited:
SouthAussie said:
Just fighting hard for his client, I think. Trying to portray everyone in a bad light, with puerile comments, to deflect from the disgusting way in which Russell's and Carol's remains were treated.

Having been around for a long time, I think Dann knew that the jury would be instructed to not take into consideration the horrible treatment of the remains, but how could that not linger (emotionally) in the back of their minds and not affect their opinions of Lynn?

imo
Click to expand...
This excerpt from the Age article gives me hope that he will be found GUILTY

"He knew he had murdered them and that if the scene had been left as it was, the forensic evidence would reveal that fact," Mr Porceddu said.

"If [the deaths] were accidental or unintentional, why would you go to the extreme and extraordinary step of burning the bodies of Mr Hill and Mrs Clay?"​
 
SouthAussie said:
Not helpful, and just plain nasty. Showing everyone that his barrister can be as nasty as Lynn, and that is "okay"?
There was SO MUCH nastiness in this trial. About Russell and Carol, about the prosecutor, about the prosecution's witnesses.
imo

"Then the insults turned personal.
An expert from earlier in the trial, police scientist Mark Gellatly, was likened to gelati — not only because his name sounded similar to the Italian dessert, but due to "the way he melted in the witness box like an ice cream in the sun".

Mr Dann, who stood while addressing the jury from the bar table, looked at prosecutor Daniel Porceddu and called him "Inspector Clouseau", a reference to the bumbling detective from the Pink Panther series."

(from your link)
Click to expand...
I listened to some of Dann's closing address on the Apple podcast and didn't like what I heard at all. He was rude and disrespectful, so much so that I decided not to listen to all of it and I definitely won't be transcribing it.

Last November Dann said a self-defence argument might be on the cards. What happened to that? Maybe this:

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

What evidence did he have to prove his client's story? RH saying he was going to take the drone footage and gun to the police was not a threat to GL's safety. Dann had no way of proving RH came at GL with a knife either. He's all smoke and mirrors.

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

Victoria abolished the partial defence of provocation for murder charges in 2005.

Murder and Manslaughter
 
JudgeJudi said:
I listened to some of Dann's closing address on the Apple podcast and didn't like what I heard at all. He was rude and disrespectful, so much so that I decided not to listen to all of it and I definitely won't be transcribing it.

Last November Dann said a self-defence argument might be on the cards. What happened to that? Maybe this:

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

What evidence did he have to prove his client's story? RH saying he was going to take the drone footage and gun to the police was not a threat to GL's safety. Dann had no way of proving RH came at GL with a knife either. He's all smoke and mirrors.

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

Victoria abolished the partial defence of provocation for murder charges in 2005.

Murder and Manslaughter
Click to expand...

Yes, I knew about the abolition of the partial defence of provocation.

And when I saw parts of the judge's summing up, I was surprised to see ... (4th item)
Haven't got my head around how this can apply in this case. Could the judge have erred, or is there something I am missing?


The judge explained to the jury it was not up to Mr Lynn to prove he was innocent.
Instead, he said, for Mr Lynn to be guilty of murder they needed to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the following four elements were true:
  • That Mr Lynn caused the campers' deaths
  • That Mr Lynn carried out the acts consciously, voluntarily and deliberately
  • That Mr Lynn performed the acts intending to kill or to cause really serious injury
  • That Mr Lynn was not acting in self-defence
www.abc.net.au

Insults fly in the courtroom as Greg Lynn's double-murder trial nears its final chapter

It's murder or acquittal — after five weeks of evidence and arguments, the jury in Greg Lynn's murder trial over the deaths of two Victorian campers only have two options to choose from.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
 
@emirates1957

Do you still have contacts in Jetstar?
If GL is acquitted, do you think they'd re-employ him again?
Even if he's acquitted, would they want one of their pilots who dealt with the bodies the way he did working for them?

I also wonder how he'll be treated at his exclusive sporting clubs. IMO he's a now a social pariah.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 137 more.
Total: 2,562 (members: 138, guests: 2,424)

Online statistics

Members online
138
Guests online
2,424
Total visitors
2,562
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,919
Messages
18,101,553
Members
230,955
Latest member
ClueCrusader
Back
Top