Australia - Russell Hill & Carol Clay Murdered While Camping - Wonnangatta Valley, 2020 #9

[Sir_Loin]

what makes you so sure that they believed what was being stated to them?

IMO they didn’t believe a word of it, he thought he was gaming them, narcs think they are smarter than detectives who have dealt with all manner of slimy lying characters. their ability to discern truth from fiction is far better than GLs pantomime performance.

Spot on. Greg Lynn physically demonstrating the Jackie Chan-esque move he said he pulled on a knife attack in the dark made me laugh out loud.

Of course the police didn’t believe him. They’ve been trained in this stuff. Just imagine them debriefing afterwards and the choice words they would have used.

Little River Raiders, his pistol club, his high country larping, hunts on his own where he never bags anything. Walter Mitty incarnate.

 

[changintimes]

Your link is incorrect and references a NSW law practice quoting NSW legislation

My apologies - I did have the correct link but copied the incorrect link in error.

The below information was connected via Your rights and entitlements - Office of Public Prosecutions

Under the heading:

A further heading has this information:


Here is a link to the correct information. VOCAT stands for Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal

About the Tribunal | Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal

This section provides a brief overview of the role and purpose of the Tribunal, our staff and Tribunal Members.

vocat.vic.gov.au

 

[changintimes]

John Silvester (in the latest article that Tootsie linked) said it seems obvious how the jury came to their decisions.

The jury asked for Lynn's testimony and the ballistic expert's evidence.
They overlayed the two to test Lynn's version of events.
And John Sylvester feels that the jury then found Lynn's story wildly improbable, leaving the prosecution's case the version that remained. Guilty.

(paraphrased from The Age article) - it is a good, descriptive article. I wish everyone could read it.

Nothing obvious in that article whatsoever IMO. What this article details is the writers' impression of what was said and the writer was not present in court as far as I am aware, therefore the 'details' are based on hearsay IMO.

 

[changintimes]

You have avoided the question again.

Why would 'it be great' for the convicted murderer to be anywhere but jail?

Because he has been wrongfully convicted and that is apparent by the total and flagrant disregard the the fair principals of court processes not being adhered to by the details the prosecutor included in his closing address. There has been numerous posts including links to media articles on WS that include what the prosecutor had stated and what the Judge had stated and what the defence counsel had stated as well. IMO

 

[changintimes]

what makes you so sure that they believed what was being stated to them?

IMO they didn’t believe a word of it, he thought he was gaming them, narcs think they are smarter than detectives who have dealt with all manner of slimy lying characters. their ability to discern truth from fiction is far better than GLs pantomime performance.

Pretty basic actually, the prosecutors decided to base their case on the parts of the interview that were permitted by the 3 judges of the Appeals Court. But the prosecutor then overstepped his mission during his closing address.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

Because he has been wrongfully convicted and that is apparent by the total and flagrant disregard the the fair principals of court processes not being adhered to by the details the prosecutor included in his closing address. There has been numerous posts including links to media articles on WS that include what the prosecutor had stated and what the Judge had stated and what the defence counsel had stated as well. IMO

Lynn is a convicted murderer awaiting sentencing. The rest is just white noise.

 

[Rocket333]

Pretty basic actually, the prosecutors decided to base their case on the parts of the interview that were permitted by the 3 judges of the Appeals Court. But the prosecutor then overstepped his mission during his closing address.

Wishing you peace & acceptance chang.

 

[sapphire blue]

Pretty basic actually, the prosecutors decided to base their case on the parts of the interview that were permitted by the 3 judges of the Appeals Court. But the prosecutor then overstepped his mission during his closing address.

pretty basic to remember that my comment was about the officers who interviewed him, not the prosecutors.

It’s rather odd to see someone on this victim friendly forum supporting a person who has admittedly committed heinous crimes (murder, destruction of evidence, moving the bodies and also desecrating the bodies) let alone a convicted murderer.

 

[Warshawski]

Because he has been wrongfully convicted and that is apparent by the total and flagrant disregard the the fair principals of court processes not being adhered to by the details the prosecutor included in his closing address. There has been numerous posts including links to media articles on WS that include what the prosecutor had stated and what the Judge had stated and what the defence counsel had stated as well. IMO

With all due respect for your thoughts, it’s my opinion that Greg should be thankful that he is only going down for the murder of 1.

But that’s just my opinion - and it’s as worthless in the scheme of things as is your opinion that ‘he has been wrongfully convicted’.

However, due to the fair & wholesome justice system that exists here in Australia, everyone ( man & their dog) is afforded an opportunity to appeal court decisions - which means that GL has an open avenue in which he can correct any perceived inaccuracies in the previous meeting.

 

[changintimes]

pretty basic to remember that my comment was about the officers who interviewed him, not the prosecutors.

It’s rather odd to see someone on this victim friendly forum supporting a person who has admittedly committed heinous crimes (murder, destruction of evidence, moving the bodies and also desecrating the bodies) let alone a convicted murderer.

With respect, the Justice system has not run to the fullest extent and has a long way to go until it is concluded, it hasn't even past the sentencing stage. You have no idea what my thoughts on this case are, you may think you know but you may well turn out to be incorrect!

The prosecutors mounted their case on the interview conducted by the two detectives you referred to. Without that interview there would not have been a prosecution. My comments in reply to your original post pointed out some valid weaknesses in the conviction.

I consider it rather odd that people consider the details of this case with such a very narrow perspective. I wonder what would happen if there was new and fresh evidence discovered?

 

[JBowie]

The experienced judge said he would be making up his own mind. Quite right too. He doesn’t need help from baggy-arsed reporters who think jurisprudence is a Beatles’ record, sub judice an American-style sandwich, and ipso facto a nursery rhyme about a spider. -- John Silvester


(pay-walled for some)

Greg Lynn and trying to pull a rabbit from a legal hat

The defence thought it would win and chose not to push for a new trial. To now say it was a miscarriage of justice is a little like getting a free kick, playing on, hitting the post and then asking for another shot.

www.smh.com.au

 

[TootsieFootsie]

John Silvester really has a way with words

 

[sapphire blue]

With respect, the Justice system has not run to the fullest extent and has a long way to go until it is concluded, it hasn't even past the sentencing stage. You have no idea what my thoughts on this case are, you may think you know but you may well turn out to be incorrect!

The prosecutors mounted their case on the interview conducted by the two detectives you referred to. Without that interview there would not have been a prosecution. My comments in reply to your original post pointed out some valid weaknesses in the conviction.

I consider it rather odd that people consider the details of this case with such a very narrow perspective. I wonder what would happen if there was new and fresh evidence discovered?

With respect this forum is for the victims, not for the alleged or convicted criminals.

He has admitted to heinous crimes against the victims - FACT.

yes the justice system has definitely not finished with him yet. For all we know he may yet face other charges related to the crimes.

What new and fresh evidence could there be when he CHOSE to destroy the evidence? Evidence that he didn’t move, burn and destroy the bodies? Evidence that he didn’t intentionally get rid of his trailer or give his car a new paint job?

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Yes and this thread is not a fan club for a convicted murderer.

 

[mam544]

Spot on. Greg Lynn physically demonstrating the Jackie Chan-esque move he said he pulled on a knife attack in the dark made me laugh out loud.

Of course the police didn’t believe him. They’ve been trained in this stuff. Just imagine them debriefing afterwards and the choice words they would have used.

Little River Raiders, his pistol club, his high country larping, hunts on his own where he never bags anything. Walter Mitty incarnate.

'larping' I had to look it up, what a great word. You learn something new every day.

 

[Tweet57]

'larping' I had to look it up, what a great word. You learn something new every day.

Me too mam. Sir and google educated me also.

 

[sapphire blue]

Larping, live action role playing. Could it all have been a live action role play by Lynn? A game he thought he controlled and could hide evidence of?

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I think he could have got carried away with a wild west theme.
I wouldn't be surprised if it has been a fantasy of his to have an actual shootout.
It has been one of my theories.

Just days before he was accepted into a Wild West gun club.