And 'we' all wait so see if there is an appeal launched. That can occur within 28 days from date of conviction or longer length of time if a later application is accepted.
And if GL had not have requested a piece of paper and a pen, I would be interested to read your thoughts on how the detectives or any other persons including the prosecutors, the judge, the jurors and others including expert witnesses, would have known the set out of the 2 individual camp sites at Bucks Camp on 20/3/2020. And also how would the detectives have known the final placement site at Union Spur Track, and the other locations GL marked on the map?
I had the same problem. Very difficult to listen to his smug, self serving explanation.
I have no doubt in my mind there will be an appeal and don't see any good reason why it will be successful.
Lynn didn't require the pen and paper for all the questions he answered while he was using it. It was a crutch and the police should have said 'thank you', taken them from him and continued questioning him without him relying on it to avoid making eye contact.
RH could well have intended turning the music down or even off until he saw the opportunity to confiscate the gun and ammo. He had a history of discussion with deer hunters in other camps in 2020 about storing guns and ammo safely and sharing the trgic death of his male relative in a deer shooting accident, which has been detailed in numerous media articles IMO and I have no doubt upon seeing the gun and ammo in a car with all doors open as detailed by GL, RH then made an instant decision to confiscate these items. RH had already spoken to GL about why he was using the drone and that had included using it at Bucks Camp for about 10 seconds when GL returned, and that he had taken footage of GL whilst he was allegedly hunting and RH had wrongly accused him of hunting illegally near Bucks Camp when GL stated he was merely making his way back to camp. RH started his radio convo at 6pm and it finished at 6.40 with no alarm noted by participants in convo.GL told detectives he was heading back to camp to have dinner.
So Russell Hill had the weapon in one hand, the ammunition in the other and while in the dark, in his pajamas, with music blaring and Lynn in pursuit of him, Hill loaded that weapon, unfamiliar to him, with one hand?
Fresh ballistic studies including studies of markings on the RH vehice applied by an attending scene officer on 28th and further examination of scene photos including aerials may well prove or support any fresh ballistic or other studies.
The 4 car doors were open and therefore highly likely the internal lights were on. A campfire was burning adjacent to the vehicle. An operational lantern was nearby RH vehicle. RH was wearing a head torch. Numerous media articles and video tape of interview.
The defence had their opportunity but chose to call no witnesses let alone expert witnesses.
Russell Hill had the weapon in one hand, the ammunition in the other, was in his pajamas with Lynn in pursuit of him and Hill loaded that unfamiliar weapon with one hand? Oh please!!
GL made eye contact many times. Detectives would have also considered permitting GL to have the proper and biro so body language experts could view certain mannerisms IMO. Detectives knew GL employment historics and would have accessed his psych records and knew hus natural thinking processes including making notes. The supply of paper and writing implement would have been a tool to relax GL IMO.
Assumptions, assumptions and more assumptions.
The defence have every right to rely upon expert witnesses evidence and testimony supplied by prosecution. The defence do not need to supply anything! It is the prosecutor that must provide proof of their charge. When you have a major expert witness admitting under oath they made errors in their statement that supposedly supports their evidence and testimony, that opens clear avenues for appeal. Links provided a couple of days ago about this witness evidence.
Far less about assumptions more like a willingness to look at matters and so called 'evidence' with an open mind.
Correct but a good defence does everything they possibly can to discredit any evidence provided by the prosecution and at the same time paint the defendant in the best possible light with the jury. Dann failed to do this as evidenced by the guilty verdict.
Where is your willingness to explain how the late Russell Hill was able to load a weapon unfamiliar to him with one hand, while in his pajamas with Lynn hot in pursuit?
The 28 days is from the date of sentencing not conviction.
So RH was worried about illegal hunting near camp + the danger of firearms and decided that recklessly stealing another persons guns & loading & shooting them in his campsite near his lady friend was a way to alleviate those concerns?
BBM - what psych records ???
