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

I think GL hunted Carol down :mad:
After he'd done away with Russell.

Hunting doesn't really tie in with her DNA being found on the canopy though. She must have been quite close to the car and under the canopy.

You're trying to analyse a proven lie.

Is he though? Fairs fair, a jury saying guilty doesn't make it a proven lie. Regardless of how unlikely it sounds.

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.

I tend to agree. That he was being honest about parts of the interaction was clear and no doubt a calculated move on his part. His claims about RH stealing, loading and firing the gun were ridiculous though. Of all the nitpicking I did I never touched that claim because it just made no sense. Was just a desperate attempt to place the gun in RHs hands somehow.


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.

imo

I didn't think they needed to. The Prosecutions own expert said Lynns version of the shooting was plausible. That's all Dann needed. Bringing in more experts just means more for the jury to follow and possibilities for prosecution to cross examine and score points.
 
\
I didn't think they needed to. The Prosecutions own expert said Lynns version of the shooting was plausible. That's all Dann needed. Bringing in more experts just means more for the jury to follow and possibilities for prosecution to cross examine and score points.

And how did that work for Dermot Dann? Lynn was found guilty of murdering Carol.

Plausible, but evidently not reasonably probable - in the jury's eyes.
 
I tend to agree. That he was being honest about parts of the interaction was clear and no doubt a calculated move on his part. His claims about RH stealing, loading and firing the gun were ridiculous though. Of all the nitpicking I did I never touched that claim because it just made no sense. Was just a desperate attempt to place the gun in RHs hands somehow.
Lynn claiming Hill had the loaded rifle in his possession and that he then tried to wrestle it from Hill, was the only way he could manufacture a murderless death for Carol Clay. It was creative but just too far fetched for the jury to buy.

If Lynn had killed Hill in any kind of lawful manner he wouldn't have had cause to murder Carol Clay and that's how the jury saw it.
 
In 2014, a google image search of Mr Lynn's address showed a white car in his driveway.
In 2019, it was blue
In 2020 it's beige. A registration check on the VicRoads website has the beige car registered as a 1997 White Nissan.
We know why he repainted the car from Blue to Beige (so he could disappear as he puts it)
The colour change from White to Blue is very interesting isn't it. The car was only 7 years old so the paint would have been in ok condition.
Giving him the benefit of the doubt :rolleyes: perhaps he had a car accident and it needed respraying. Isn't it more cost-effective to respray in the same colour?
 
I didn't think they needed to. The Prosecutions own expert said Lynns version of the shooting was plausible. That's all Dann needed. Bringing in more experts just means more for the jury to follow and possibilities for prosecution to cross examine and score points.
Plainly the defence needed to do something more because their client, Greg Lynn, is in jail awaiting sentence for murder.

But Dann was completely hamstrung as far as calling witnesses and that's why he didn't.

Firstly, he needed to find reputable experts who would stand in a witness box and support Lynn's far fetched claims. That means working your way through experts until you hopefully find one who might actually say what you want the jury to hear.

Secondly, because of the type of person Greg Lynn is and the type of history he has, character witnesses were completely out of the question and this left the defence with only one possible card they could play. The defence's last and rarely played card. The accused themselves taking the stand. The same accused who will be at the pleasure of His Majesty for however long the judge rules at his sentencing hearing.
 
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.
The moral behind the story of Little Red Riding Hood is that even the friendliest of strangers can have bad intentions
 
We know why he repainted the car from Blue to Beige (so he could disappear as he puts it)
The colour change from White to Blue is very interesting isn't it. The car was only 7 years old so the paint would have been in ok condition.
Giving him the benefit of the doubt :rolleyes: perhaps he had a car accident and it needed respraying. Isn't it more cost-effective to respray in the same colour?
Could be he found white too glaring in the extreme heat in Victoria.
 
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.
Not sure if this is behind a paywall but was published in yesterday's Herald Sun written by Andrew Rule:

"If Greg Lynn appeals, which he almost certainly will, the wife-bashing, pet-killing, car-painting, camouflage-wearing gun crank could soon be back on the street."
"If that’s how the Wonnangatta killings eventually play out, it means a calculating psychopath will have created a legal blueprint for how to create reasonable doubt through the deliberate and meticulous destruction of evidence."
"If the Lynn defence ultimately succeeds, and he once more walks amongst us, it threatens to open an escape hatch in future homicide cases where the accused “does a Greg Lynn.”
full article here:
 
Could be he found white too glaring in the extreme heat in Victoria.
(PhysOrg.com) -- From an environmental standpoint, silver and white cars are cool; black cars are not. A light-colored shell reflects more sunlight than a dark car shell. The cooler the color, the cooler the cabin air, and the less of a need to run your air conditioner.
 
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.
Thankyou. I have watched that and I can't see where it is detailed which side of the vehicle from which he approached Hill. I will watch again and note the exact time on the video.

I don't think the complete video is available. It appears to be split into different sections. I will make not of times.
 
(PhysOrg.com) -- From an environmental standpoint, silver and white cars are cool; black cars are not. A light-colored shell reflects more sunlight than a dark car shell. The cooler the color, the cooler the cabin air, and the less of a need to run your air conditioner.
White cars reflect more glare which can affect eyesight too. I have personally suffered and my eye surgeon advised not to drive a white car.

Many of the white paints used have a silver base to cause a pearlized effect is how she described it in plain terms. It's the reflection from the bonnett and window surrounds that are painted not other cars on the road.
 
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."

It was reported in the media at trial that GL then RH then slipped and this caused him to spin around andcthatcisxwhen the shot went off accidentally. I will hunt for articles.
 
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.
Dann concentrated on the only person that could provide direct evidence. IMO
 
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.

imo
Are you able to supply proof of what exact precise condition the passenger side rear vision mirror was in and the positioning of such when forensic and ballistic testing took place and what positioning the mirror was left in when GL departed the scene and when police first arrived on the scene and when they took their first forensic photos of the scene?
 
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.
Both my brother and my father were left-handed when writing but right-handed cricketers, and when using tools. something that was always a joke in our family.
GL's goes into very methodical detail about how and where he approached RH in the police interview.... you would have to watch it to hear his well-rehearsed version of events.
Watching that interview made me soooo very very angry. IMO he had been over and over his version of events time and time again on paper so much so that it was drilled in to him. Asking for paper at the start of his interview allowed him to stick to his fanciful well rehearsed bull%#!t story. IMO he sat through that interview like he was the one who had the control!
Rant over!
 
It was reported in the media at trial that GL then RH then slipped and this caused him to spin around andcthatcisxwhen the shot went off accidentally. I will hunt for articles.

Yes, it would be appreciated if you could provide links for what you are saying. Something we all try to do to back up what we say.

Are you able to supply proof of what exact precise condition the passenger side rear vision mirror was in and the positioning of such when forensic and ballistic testing took place and what positioning the mirror was left in when GL departed the scene and when police first arrived on the scene and when they took their first forensic photos of the scene?

I think you really need to research this case a little better. There are photos of what was left of the mirror on the vehicle. Lynn stated he had trouble yanking it off, then burned what he could tear away in the fire.

It is problematic that we should provide "proof" when it is evident that you have not researched the case very well, and do not appear to know the basic facts.

imo
 
Last edited:

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
170
Guests online
2,214
Total visitors
2,384

Forum statistics

Threads
598,063
Messages
18,075,221
Members
230,514
Latest member
soraxtm
Back
Top