I haven't been following closely, was there any attempt to re-create exactly the moves in the two fights - especially the knife part, but also the wrestling with the gun plus knife...?An unbelievably lucky modern day Houdini it would seem…. Who, rather than counting his lucky stars for his purportedly miraculous escape from not just one, but two potential murder weapons, nonetheless had such little confidence that police would believe his account that he sought to destroy all evidence associated with his purportedly Houdini like escape?
It seems it would be really difficult to say which one is certain, which not so much. GL's actions afterwards convince me of one murder at least. That means I don't believe his story. Then how do I know what really happened?From what we are hearing it sounds like the jury might be close enough to unanimous for guilty on one murder and perhaps hung on the other?
Verdicts may not be too far away.
The ballistics expert witness, Paul Griffiths, said that to fire Lynn's shotgun, the user would need to manually load the magazine, rack the bolt-action and then kock it before releasing the safety mechanism and then pulling the heavier than average, 3.95 pound trigger.
Griffiths conceded the trajectory of a shot hitting Carol Clay from where the scuffle was alleged to have occurred was plausible but did he concede it was plausible the weapon would go off inadvertently during a struggle? Assuming of course that it was first plausible that Russell Hill had loaded the weapon and factoring into that that it was dark and the weapon was setup for a left handed person? Don't forget that pesky guy rope and loud music intended to annoy either.
The defence would have us believe Russell Hill was a modern day Houdini.
(I was forced to spell a word in the 1st paragraph incorrectly as the correct spelling wasn't acceptable here)
Imagine the look of shock on the staffer's face when the jury foreman asks him if they can have the table removed because they need more space to work in.I haven't been following closely, was there any attempt to re-create exactly the moves in the two fights - especially the knife part, but also the wrestling with the gun plus knife...?
Maybe the jury are trying to re-enact it back in the jury room?
JMO
Every skerrik of the circumstantial evidence in this case points to a double murder. The only thing supporting anything other than a double murder is Lynn fanciful and ever so convenient story.Shots were supposedly fired in the air before the scuffle. Considering that it's not beyond belief it was cocked and ready to fire when the scuffle broke out. The 4kg trigger pull would be irrelevant in the scuffle scenario. The average males grip strength is 46kg. Factor in someone else pulling the opposite direction and 4kg is nothing.
From what I've seen in the case the main difference in the gun being set up for a left handed person is the sights. Also irrelevant in the scuffle scenario.
Again I'm not trying to make an argument for this being the case just verbalising what I would be asking if I was in the juries position and imo the prosecution has left too many questions unanswered.
It seems it would be really difficult to say which one is certain, which not so much. GL's actions afterwards convince me of one murder at least. That means I don't believe his story. Then how do I know what really happened?
I'm also certain I read that when the 2 guys were grappling over the gun, Mr Hill was bent backwards.
It's also interesting how both victims alleged died instantly, so GL had no reason to question whether they might survive if he went and got help. No groans or movement?I believe a truly innocent person would not try to completely obliterate every sign of what happened at the camp site.
Then destroy the bodies to such an extent that all manner of their deaths is hidden, even to forensic scientists.
Every skerrik of the circumstantial evidence in this case points to a double murder. The only thing supporting anything other than a double murder is Lynn fanciful and ever so convenient story.
Lynn story consists of many unlikely things and for his story to hold up all those unlikely things need to be believed. They are like links in a chain and they all need to stand up or the chain breaks, his story falls over and we are left with a double murder.
The jury may see things differently and only find him guilty of one of the murders. We shall see.
That's the logical sequence a juror can't ignore IMO too. The extensive and elaborate cover up (which isn't being disputed) has to destroy any credibility in GLs account of the events at the camp-site.
Over analysis of those events is what the defence wants to cast doubt.
MOO.
Pardon me, I've only been following this from the very beginning, what two fights?I haven't been following closely, was there any attempt to re-create exactly the moves in the two fights - especially the knife part, but also the wrestling with the gun plus knife...?
Maybe the jury are trying to re-enact it back in the jury room?
JMO
Excellent point Mr Hardy.Is there any evidence the knife even existed? Let alone that it is the reason Russell Hill is no longer with us?