Found Deceased Australia - Russell Hill, 74, & Carol Clay, 72, Wonnangatta Valley, 20 March 2020

[Panda]

I think taking the drone makes sense in any foul play situation, whether a random attack, an escalated argument with other people they’ve come across or an attack by someone they knew etc. there would always be the possibility they had captured some footage on the drone that linked the person to the being in the area such as a car or campsite. Taking the drone could just be the person/persons covering their tracks

I don't think the drone itself captures any footage - from my understanding it is the actual phone that is used in conjunction with the drone that would record any data. However, I'm not 100% sure on this. Ramjet would have a better understanding, as I believe Ramjet did a fair amount of research on the drone in question.

My belief is that the foul play occurred at night time, therefore I don't see that anything captured on the drone would be a motive, as they wouldn't have used the drone yet. Just my opinion though.

 

[Steffy_jade]

Ah o

I don't think the drone itself captures any footage - from my understanding it is the actual phone that is used in conjunction with the drone that would record any data. However, I'm not 100% sure on this. Ramjet would have a better understanding, as I believe Ramjet did a fair amount of research on the drone in question.

My belief is that the foul play occurred at night time, therefore I don't see that anything captured on the drone would be a motive, as they wouldn't have used the drone yet. Just my opinion though.

Ah ok fair enough I’m not sure, I assumed they recorded to an sd card like a camera.
Two of my friends have the same drone as what Russell had and they use them every time we go camping and I still couldn’t tell you if it has an sd card or saves to a phone, so maybe most people would see a drone and if they haven’t had experience using one or a particular interest in them they might assume the same as me?
I don’t mean the drone necessarily captured anything incriminating that was the motive for an attack, but just the possibility that whoever is responsible was most likely in the area for a while, (i can’t see someone showing up in the middle of the night out of the blue and finding their camp without being noticed) So they couldn’t rule out the possibility that Russell and carol had been flying the drone in the evening and might have inadvertently filmed their vehicle or camp, and with the assumption that it records to an sd card or internal hard drive, have taken it as a precaution. Just a thought I had anyway

 

[bearbear]

if they always chose the same campsite, whoever killed them may have known and parked further away, walking to their camp in the dark, maybe watched and waited awhile for their lamp or whatever to go off?
im wondering why russell went on his own days before only to return with carol, was he setting something up?
is it a long drive from where he lived?

 

[trujac]

There seems to be a lot of clues about what happened to RH and CC. First, the ham radio call at around 6:30 pm--the static during the call could have happened because of electric or appliance interference (a computer near by). It seems possible someone listened into RH's called where he discussed going to set up his camp before getting dark, and then planned to murder him. Then the targeted tent fire. Why obliterate the entire tent and its contents unless trace evidence was in the tent? i.e., Blood and DNA are believed to be no longer traceable after exposure to a temperature of 1000 °C. The fact that fire investigators could not determine what started the fire and there was also no death related physical evidence of RH and CC around the campsite also suggests that killer(s) didn't want LE investigators to have any clues as to what happened to RH and CC. It's possible that RH staged the tent fire to cover up his involvement in CC's disappearance, or the two of them planned it together; however, it appears all of their belongings (less their cell phones and the drone) were left behind, as well as the fact that LE are now framing RH and CC's disappearance as a probable murder, makes this scenario unlikely. The other issue concerning RH's previous visit to the area roughly a week earlier is also interesting...driving a long distance of over 600 miles to a camping area twice in a short period of time seems a little odd but retired people can spend their time pretty freely. In sum, the known and unknown facts of this case seems to suggest to me a meticulously planned abduction and murder by a skilled killer who unfortunately saw an opportunity to kill that they couldn't pass up.

 

[Via Marple]

I recall reading somewhere early on that their mobile phones were also missing, although I am not looking up any links now..

So what's missing ... 1 drone, 2 mobiles, plus 2 people? What about wallets/money?

 

[trujac]

I recall reading somewhere early on that their mobile phones were also missing, although I am not looking up any links now..

So what's missing ... 1 drone, 2 mobiles, plus 2 people? What about wallets/money?

Here is one article written by Simone Fox Koob and Rachel Eddie (April 22) that states: "Police have not found either of their mobile phones." The statement is at the end of the article. I couldn't find any other news articles about their mobile phones...but thought too it was circulated early on in several news briefs that the mobile phones were missing; that's a good question--what else was missing?? Missing Wallets would cast a different light on things.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/...days-before-camping-trip-20200422-p54m7y.html

 

[Panda]

There's been no information about missing wallets or money. I presume they were left in the vehicle, which was locked. They wouldn't have any need for money camping, so it's unlikely they would put them in the tent, unless Russell had his wallet in the back pocket of his jeans. Normally when camping, one tends to leave valuables in the vehicle however, so he most probably would have removed his wallet from his jeans and left it in the vehicle before retiring in the tent for the night.

 

[trujac]

if they always chose the same campsite, whoever killed them may have known and parked further away, walking to their camp in the dark, maybe watched and waited awhile for their lamp or whatever to go off?
im wondering why russell went on his own days before only to return with carol, was he setting something up?
is it a long drive from where he lived?

Apparently back in February of this year another camper set up camp next to RH and CC, and had a brief conservation with them..."Scott McDonald, an avid camper himself, claims he saw the pair camping at Pikes Flat, about a month before they went missing...he stated that RH had his Ham Radio wire strung to a tree and was using it"...and it was clear that RH and CC weren't married, as they both commented about returning to different homes. So, it appears from this article that RH and CC were going camping fairly regularly together in basically the same vicinity...which supports the possibility that someone else had noticed them often enough to scope out their basic camping routine, and when they were most vulnerable for a quick sabotage.
https://7news.com.au/news/vic/missi...together-month-before-disappearance-c-1057655

 

[TootsieFootsie]

No way I would ever leave money or valuables in my vehicle overnight unattended, even if I was camping in a remote area.
If I could get there in my vehicle, then others could.

I would never be able to sleep knowing my valuables were not with me.

 

[Tinker Taylor]

I'm new to this thread, but I've had a thought after reading the posts.

Has anyone considered that the fire may have started when the couple was asleep during the night?

If both had been burned and or inhaled smoke and the keys were left inside the tent, they would have had no option other than to try to find help on foot. This would mean that they would have travelled in the opposite direction to where the search was conducted.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Yes this thought occured to me too.

Has anyone considered that the fire may have started when the couple was asleep during the night

 

[trujac]

No way I would ever leave money or valuables in my vehicle overnight unattended, even if I was camping in a remote area.
If I could get there in my vehicle, then others could.

I would never be able to sleep knowing my valuables were not with me.

yes, I agree...you'd hope in a dire emergency you'd be able to get to your vehicle and drive away--but instant survival would dictate have the essentials (wallet, keys, etc) close by in case of having to run for your life...which brings me to question--didn't they have a gun for self-defense in the tent?? Or at least potent animal repellent? I know I would have a hand gun by my head while sleeping in a tent in the middle of nowhere.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Most people in Australia normally would not have access to a gun.

 

[Tinker Taylor]

yes, I agree...you'd hope in a dire emergency you'd be able to get to your vehicle and drive away--but instant survival would dictate have the essentials (wallet, keys, etc) close by in case of having to run for your life...which brings me to question--didn't they have a gun for self-defense in the tent?? Or at least potent animal repellent? I know I would have a hand gun by my head while sleeping in a tent in the middle of nowhere.

Yes, keys, wallet, phone, etc close by the bed. That's what makes me think they wouldn't be able to drive the vehicle with the keys lost in the fire.

Not sure about the gun. Firearms aren't easily obtained in Australia for the normal person. Rifles only for hunting and you need to have a reason (a farmer gives you permission to shoot on his property and will give you a stat dec to say so) and pistols are tightly controlled. We don't have any carnivores here that will try to eat you in your tent.

 

[trujac]

I'm new to this thread, but I've had a thought after reading the posts.

Has anyone considered that the fire may have started when the couple was asleep during the night?

If both had been burned and or inhaled smoke and the keys were left inside the tent, they would have had no option other than to try to find help on foot. This would mean that they would have travelled in the opposite direction to where the search was conducted.

That's an interesting thought...One reason why I have always hidden a spare vehicle key under the chassis of my vehicle--so a lost vehicle key doesn't end up costing me my life. Hopefully, RH took that safety precaution and had a spare key on his vehicle somewhere.

 

[trujac]

Yes, keys, wallet, phone, etc close by the bed. That's what makes me think they wouldn't be able to drive the vehicle with the keys lost in the fire.

Not sure about the gun. Firearms aren't easily obtained in Australia for the normal person. Rifles only for hunting and you need to have a reason (a farmer gives you permission to shoot on his property and will give you a stat dec to say so) and pistols are tightly controlled. We don't have any carnivores here that will try to eat you in your tent.

A rifle would have helped a lot it would seem if they were preyed upon...otherwise, how would you realistically defend yourself in an extremely remote area??

 

[Tinker Taylor]

That's an interesting thought...One reason why I have always hidden a spare vehicle key under the chassis of my vehicle--so a lost vehicle key doesn't end up costing me my life. Hopefully, RH took that safety precaution and had a spare key on his vehicle somewhere.

I would hope that the Police have had a good look to see if there was a spare hidden on the body of the vehicle.

I really think sometimes that the simple answer is the first one to investigate. The "running away together" theory and the "murdered and taken away" theories shouldn't be the only ones you think of.

 

[trujac]

I would think if they accidently burnt down their tent and walked away looking for help that they would have left a note on their truck saying they were in need of help in the event another camper happened to see the fire damage at their campsite and stopped to check it out.

 

[Tinker Taylor]

A rifle would have helped a lot it would seem if they were preyed upon...otherwise, how would you realistically defend yourself in an extremely remote area??

You wouldn't normally think of being "preyed upon" or needing to "defend yourself" in a remote area. If that's how you think, I don't think camping in a remote area is for you.

Someone coming into your tent will just need to undo a zip, so it's unlikely to wake you in time for you to get your rifle and defend yourself. Anyway, as I said, firearms are not freely available here.

 

[Tinker Taylor]

I would think if they accidently burnt down their tent and walked away looking for help that they would have left a note on their truck saying they were in need of help in the event another camper happened to see the fire damage at their campsite and stopped to check it out.

I'm thinking they would both be injured and not thinking clearly. I don't know how they would get pen and paper to leave a note with their tent and belongings on fire.