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

[SouthAussie]

I think Russell's daughter is going to appear on 60 Minutes this Sunday. Just saw a promo about it. With a really quick flash of her. I think she said "he didn't deserve to die".


Looking a little further, it does look like there will be a segment this week.

Secrets of a Murderer
Russell Hill and Carol Clay didn’t deserve to die. Four years ago, on a camping adventure in Victoria’s remote high country, they had a chance encounter with Greg Lynn. Only he now knows the precise details of what happened, but there was a dispute that turned violent. The couple, both in their 70s, were killed. Last Tuesday, in an unusual verdict, a jury found Lynn guilty of murdering Carol though not guilty of murdering Russell. But the conviction of the former Jetstar pilot does not mean it’s case-closed just yet. On 60 Minutes, Sarah Abo reveals disturbing secrets about Greg Lynn’s past that authorities need to investigate further.

60 Minutes: June 30 | TV Tonight

Sarah Abo reports on a murder following a forced marriage in the Afghan community.

tvtonight.com.au

 

[changintimes]

Here are a couple of links.

I can't remember where I read Lynn's description of the "struggle". Can't find it on a quick look. Not sure if he describes it in its entirety in the 2nd link below (video).

But Lynn said he had Russell pushed up against the bullbar at the front of Russell's vehicle, Russell's back was to the bullbar, Lynn was facing him. Lynn had two hands on the shotgun. One on the barrel, one on the stop.
(And the shotgun would have needed to be at the side of the vehicle to hit the mirror and go into Carol who was supposedly crouching by the rear tyre)
There was also a guy rope at the front of the vehicle, which would have got in the way of any struggle. Lynn "didn't see" that.

I don't believe Lynn's story. And neither do the police. Nor, apparently, did the jury.
It couldn't have happened that way.

Thread 8, post 461

Thread 8, post 921

Thankyou. The police report said the shotgun was set up for a left hander but Lynn is obviously right-handed. And when the ballistic expert said about this in testimony Lynn mouthed the word 'bullsxxt', this I read in a media article and I will post a link. I am sure I heard him describe that he that is GL, had moved in such a way to turn RH around to face the other way which I took to mean facing the vehicle.

Has it been said which side of the vehicle Lynn had approached RH, was it from driver or passenger side? I have not read or heard about this approach direction.

 

[changintimes]

The prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. If an expert witness says something is plausible, that means it's possible but there could be many other possibilities.

That is true but what did the jurors actually witness in court and did they get to personally view ballistic and other expert reports in order to fully comprehend the experts' evidence? Did they get to view live footage from ballistic tests? The height of individuals at their position, the height of the vehicle, any angles the vehicle was parked at and this is front to back and side to side and soil levels, vehicle dimensions including tyres? Height and precise positioning of mirror and its dimensions, gap between mirror edge and vehicle, edge could also be the plastic mirror mount, the metal mirror mount dimensions and type of metal, CC's known height, various crouching positions and height to her head including all possible angles? Etc etc etc. And then there are all the tech bits re the shotgun. It gets very very complicated. Which shotgun was actually used in trajectory tests?

 

[acehard]

In Victoria, tampering with the remains only covers sexual activity with a corpse. They need to up their game in respect of their law about tampering with a corpse.

@JudgeJudi referred to it in this post. There are also other links out there about it.

Thanks. That's insane. You would get at least 5-10y in the US

 

[AussieIan]

Yes, I understand. However, it means you should probably not be chosen to be a jury member. During voir dire it would need to be something that was mentioned, to give the prosecutor and the defence (and the judge) the opportunity to seat you or exclude you.

It is important to have jury members who can follow the law, and the judge's instructions, in their decisions. That avoids a hung jury and (potentially) weeks of a trial without a clear verdict.

imo

My experience sitting through a trial recently that resulted in a murder conviction was the judges instructions to the jury allowed them to interpret the law as they saw it applying in this case, I don't think it's as simple as them just 'following the law'. Obviously there is a base guideline to follow but they were definitely allowed their own interpretations and some people would naturally have stricter or looser interpretations.

I feel like the purpose of having a jury with those 12 different points of view, life experiences, ways of assessing evidence etc includes everyone's different interpretation of terms. It feels like it defeats the purpose of getting 12 strangers together if they all approach the conviction with the same methodology.

Ive heard it said that if you're innocent you should request trial by jury, if you're guilty you should request trial by judge.

Was curious why that may be.

Reading these recent posts I'd forgotten how gross Lynn's past was.

 

[jjleroche]

Whilst perusing some of the recent commentary regarding "Ramjet", the Websleuther who has been "off air" for some time now, coinciding with the approximate time that GL has been in custody, a thought popped into my mind.

Does anyone have any thoughts regarding the possibility that a "mole" may have infiltrated Websleuths with a view to temporarily filling in for Ramjet during his enforced absence?

Mods - from what I can gather, it is OK to mention Ramjet now. Please delete if I have this wrong.
JMO

 

[acehard]

This is going to be the appeal of the century.

Does anyone realistically think they will have this overturned?

I just get a feeling that this case isn’t done yet. Have always had a bad feeling about it.

I don't think so because

1. If you read the DPP vs Lynn, all the typical arguments were already addressed and they said let the jury decide. DPP v Lynn [2024] VSCA 62 (12 April 2024)

2. Him going back to destroy all evidence is probably what convinced the jury. Most people would have just dug a grave somewhere and never return.

3. These seems to be no law for desecrating a corpse so it became an all or nothing situation. IMO this worked against him.

Unless some new evidence comes to light, I don't see how an appeal would succeed.

 

[Bats]

Thankyou. The police report said the shotgun was set up for a left hander but Lynn is obviously right-handed. And when the ballistic expert said about this in testimony Lynn mouthed the word 'bullsxxt', this I read in a media article and I will post a link. I am sure I heard him describe that he that is GL, had moved in such a way to turn RH around to face the other way which I took to mean facing the vehicle.

Has it been said which side of the vehicle Lynn had approached RH, was it from driver or passenger side? I have not read or heard about this approach direction.

You can watch the Police interview that was shown to jurors. At a bit after the 1 hour mark Greg Lynn acts out his story of what happened when Carol was shot.

 

[AussieIan]

Totally agree. Customs and Quarantine Officer’s would always look at the young dude coming back from Bali expecting to find drug’s …. Whilst your little old blue rinse lady was smuggling drugs by the bucket load.

Just an amusing aside but a mate was pulled aside by quarantine coming back from SEA with dozens of packets of smokes. They just pulled em out then put em back and let him go. We were wondering why he didn't get a fine or confiscated but apparently quarantine don't do that it's customs/border force job so quarantine didn't care. Lucky bustard

I remember reading or hearing somewhere that when truthful accounts are retold it’s usually done with emotions - what the person was feeling during the time eg. “I was scared” or “I was shaken”, but GL’s account was very methodical and mechanical.

I dunno if that means much I've had to testify a couple of times and I try to recount events like that, just stating the facts and trying to keep emotion out of it. I always thought it comes across a lot better than someone crying or getting angry while giving evidence.

I am yet to meet anybody, anywhere who does. Anybody here met anybody who actually believes GL's story?

I think it was a mix of truth, lies and ommittance.

Really thought-provoking post Cedars.

IIRC ProfCluezo noted that the sleeping bags of Carol Clay and Russell Hill were never found, and pondered the possibility of both victims being shot whilst in their sleeping bags, in their tent.

IMO that theory is very plausible. Given the points in your post, I'm starting to think it's highly probable.



JMO

The sleeping bags were discussed early on and I always thought the thing that made the most sense was when someone commented that dragging a 90kg dead weight body would be HARD. But if you put a body in a sleeping bag it's quite easy to drag a sleeping bag even If it's the same weight. It would also help contain mess. I totally believe Lynn has it in him to kill in a rage but I still think killing them in their sleeping bags is a bit much.

I think anyone can see - just by studying the photo of Russell's vehicle, noting where and how this "struggle" allegedly took place, noting where Carol allegedly was, noting the condition of the vehicle where Lynn ripped the mirror off (the strongest part of the mirror is still attached) - that there is no way a shot could have accidently killed Carol.

Respectfully I disagree and the ballistics expert did say it was plausible.

 

[jjleroche]

I don't think so because

1. If you read the DPP vs Lynn, all the typical arguments were already addressed and they said let the jury decide. DPP v Lynn [2024] VSCA 62 (12 April 2024)

2. Him going back to destroy all evidence is probably what convinced the jury. Most people would have just dug a grave somewhere and never return.

3. These seems to be no law for desecrating a corpse so it became an all or nothing situation. IMO this worked against him.

Unless some new evidence comes to light, I don't see how an appeal would succeed.

I agree acehard that unless new evidence comes to light, it would appear to be an uphill battle to win an appeal. (JMO).

Hopefully, any possible "technicalities" have been covered as per your first point.

Regarding the third point, legislation does exist regarding desecration of a corpse in the jurisdiction of Victoria
- Section 34BB of the Crimes Act.

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 34BB Offensive conduct involving human remains

classic.austlii.edu.au

 

[Bats]

That is true but what did the jurors actually witness in court and did they get to personally view ballistic and other expert reports in order to fully comprehend the experts' evidence? Did they get to view live footage from ballistic tests? The height of individuals at their position, the height of the vehicle, any angles the vehicle was parked at and this is front to back and side to side and soil levels, vehicle dimensions including tyres? Height and precise positioning of mirror and its dimensions, gap between mirror edge and vehicle, edge could also be the plastic mirror mount, the metal mirror mount dimensions and type of metal, CC's known height, various crouching positions and height to her head including all possible angles? Etc etc etc. And then there are all the tech bits re the shotgun. It gets very very complicated. Which shotgun was actually used in trajectory tests?

You're trying to analyse a proven lie.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

That is true but what did the jurors actually witness in court and did they get to personally view ballistic and other expert reports in order to fully comprehend the experts' evidence? Did they get to view live footage from ballistic tests? The height of individuals at their position, the height of the vehicle, any angles the vehicle was parked at and this is front to back and side to side and soil levels, vehicle dimensions including tyres? Height and precise positioning of mirror and its dimensions, gap between mirror edge and vehicle, edge could also be the plastic mirror mount, the metal mirror mount dimensions and type of metal, CC's known height, various crouching positions and height to her head including all possible angles? Etc etc etc. And then there are all the tech bits re the shotgun. It gets very very complicated. Which shotgun was actually used in trajectory tests?

Jurors are people chosen from a juror's pool that has been randomly chosen from the population. These people are not expected to have any particular expertise. In fact, it is quite conceivable some have almost none.

That is why expert witnesses are called to provide specific expertise to the court and explain their findings to the jury in a manner a layman might be expected to understand.

It is not the jurors' role to try and 'out expert' the experts.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

I think it was a mix of truth, lies and ommittance.

Lynn's story was a narrative he carefully constructed with one aim and one aim only. To make the at least one and probably two murders he committed, go away. His story was in parts believable because he used truth as its general framework, knowing that truth is easier to remember and harder to discredit.

But into the truth Lynn was forced to weave the lies necessary to deceive and make his murdering look like something less. Being no fool and having plenty of time to work with, Lynn was able to concoct a cunning tale but the lies, though clever, were just too hard to believe. That Lynn was devious and callous enough to destroy all the evidence and silence the only people who could offer views other than his own convenient narrative, certainly made his task easier but Lynn fought the law and the law won.

 

[SouthAussie]

I am sure I heard him describe that he that is GL, had moved in such a way to turn RH around to face the other way which I took to mean facing the vehicle.

I am guessing you didn't listen to the video. No "face the other way".


"I grabbed the shotgun barrel with my right arm, pivoted around so I was facing him, him facing away from the bonnet of the car."

Watch how Greg Lynn explained campers' deaths to police after his arrest during murder investigation

Newly released police tapes reveal how Greg Lynn explained the deaths of Carol Clay and Russell Hill to officers during the interview in which he was charged with their murders.

www.abc.net.au

 

[BreakingNews]

Except he forgot to turn Russell's phone off - not so smart now, are you, Mr Cleverpants?

Yep, that error crashed his plane.

 

[SouthAussie]

That is true but what did the jurors actually witness in court and did they get to personally view ballistic and other expert reports in order to fully comprehend the experts' evidence? Did they get to view live footage from ballistic tests? The height of individuals at their position, the height of the vehicle, any angles the vehicle was parked at and this is front to back and side to side and soil levels, vehicle dimensions including tyres? Height and precise positioning of mirror and its dimensions, gap between mirror edge and vehicle, edge could also be the plastic mirror mount, the metal mirror mount dimensions and type of metal, CC's known height, various crouching positions and height to her head including all possible angles? Etc etc etc. And then there are all the tech bits re the shotgun. It gets very very complicated. Which shotgun was actually used in trajectory tests?

Did the defence bring in any experts to try to help corroborate Lynn's story? No.

It would be good to have a think about why they didn't do that. Because it would have been the best way to prove that Carol's death could have happened in the way in which Lynn described. The best way to combat the ballistics expert's testimony.

Dermot Dann is not a numbskull. He probably did talk to an expert, and after that Dann knew which things to leave alone.

imo

 

[Cliff Hardy]

Did the defence bring in any experts to try to help corroborate Lynn's story? No.

It would be good to have a think about why they didn't do that. Because it would have been the best way to prove that Carol's death could have happened in the way in which Lynn described. The best way to combat the ballistics expert's testimony.

Dermot Dann is not a numbskull. He probably did talk to an expert, and after that Dann knew which things to leave alone.

imo

Because of what he did, his past and the type of person Lynn is, Dann was limited as to who he could call. So limited in fact that Lynn himself ended up being the defence's only witness.

 

[SouthAussie]

Because of what he did, his past and the type of person Lynn is, Dann was limited as to who he could call. So limited in fact that Lynn himself ended up being the defence's only witness.

Exactly. I do wish some would think about the whole picture. Dermot Dann is a KC, for goodness sake. Not his first rodeo.

If he could have put up a good defence, using experts and other witnesses, he would have.

Instead he was reduced to name-calling to try to discredit the 49 prosecution witnesses.

imo

 

[Cliff Hardy]

Exactly. I do wish some would think about the whole picture. Dermot Dann is a KC, for goodness sake. Not his first rodeo.

If he could have put up a good defence, using experts and other witnesses, he would have.

Instead he was reduced to name-calling to try to discredit the 49 prosecution witnesses.

imo

Dann didn't have much to work with but Lynn was able to avoid it just being a laydown misere by destroying all the evidence.

 

[acehard]

I agree acehard that unless new evidence comes to light, it would appear to be an uphill battle to win an appeal. (JMO).

Hopefully, any possible "technicalities" have been covered as per your first point.

Regarding the third point, legislation does exist regarding desecration of a corpse in the jurisdiction of Victoria
- Section 34BB of the Crimes Act.

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 34BB Offensive conduct involving human remains

classic.austlii.edu.au

Thanks for the link. That's not much of a charge. In the US you can be charged with 2-3 offenses for destroying, moving and hiding a body. People get 5-10yrs and in some cases they can push it even longer. This would have been an automatic prison sentence regardless of murder. Not sure about Australian law.