Australia - Russell Hill & Carol Clay Murdered While Camping - Wonnangatta Valley, 2020 #7

[JudgeJudi]

It's remarkable how often 'phone going dark' becomes key evidence against the accused in recent years. Switching your phone off can be highly incriminating.

Yes, it can be incriminating, but not proof of your location or time. If it’s on, you can’t dispute either. The Alex Murdaugh case was a perfect example of that.

 

[SouthAussie]

The prosecutor also made another good point. Why would Russell take Lynn's shotgun but not his rifle?
Lynn told the police that Russell had filmed him with the drone when he was using his rifle.

If you are going to take a person's firearm why leave that person with a firearm?

And why did Russell (apparently) load the shotgun when all he was (apparently) going to do was take it to the police? Along with his drone footage of Lynn using a different firearm.

I hope this is a switched on jury who can see all of the things that make no sense.

Lynn answered 1200 police questions, told no lies: defence

The prosecutor has asked the jury to reject as “fiction” accused killer Gregory Lynn’s claim the deaths were accidental.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Poirot's niece]

One thing that stood out to me was his wife’s comments of the car and trailer looking like his from the 60 minutes program…. and then her taking a photo of him hand painting his car (with a roller!) a different colour. Surely she was suss at this point. A strategic move to take the photo knowing it would be evidence against him? The silence from those around him make me inclined to think they know he is more than capable of being responsible for these murders.

Certainly seems she was suss. Might not of been certain but it does appear it could have been a 'just in case' photo. If the cops have visited, that car on tv is the only one not ruled out and he quickly paints it beige with a handroller, yup, alarm bells.
Also, Lynn said he'd repainted his car before, which is not uncommon for an older vehicle used for off road stuff but I'd be wondering about the timings of the previous re-paints. Then removing rack & awning.....

 

[Poirot's niece]

BBM: Is this guy serious!! Leaves! Yep that would work to keep animals away

Its preposterous isn't it. A seasoned hunter claims leaves will deter all sorts of animals and critters from scenting blood seeping cadavers. Its one of the crazier things said by the accused. It in no way matches his skills and understanding as a bushman, hunter, fisher. That and somehow Russell takes his unloaded shotgun from Lynn's car, loads it despite not having a weapon since 1996-which he inherited from his Father, doesn't sound like it resembles Lynn's contemporary mag loaded single barrel red light scoped weapon.

 

[ScottToorak]

Personally I think GL is guilty of murder but cannot see how a jury can find him guilty of murder beyond reasonable doubt. How is " reasonable doubt" measured or what is the standard for "reasonable doubt"?

 

[SouthAussie]

Personally I think GL is guilty of murder but cannot see how a jury can find him guilty of murder beyond reasonable doubt. How is " reasonable doubt" measured or what is the standard for "reasonable doubt"?

"They need to be sure enough that any other conclusion would seem far-fetched or unreasonable."

Beyond Reasonable Doubt (Criminal) vs. Balance of Probabilities (Civil)

The criminal standard of proof is guilt beyond reasonable doubt whereas balance of probabilities is the standard of proof for civil cases.

www.criminal-lawyers.com.au

 

[discostu]

The prosecutor also made another good point. Why would Russell take Lynn's shotgun but not his rifle?
Lynn told the police that Russell had filmed him with the drone when he was using his rifle.

If you are going to take a person's firearm why leave that person with a firearm?

And why did Russell (apparently) load the shotgun when all he was (apparently) going to do was take it to the police? Along with his drone footage of Lynn using a different firearm.

I hope this is a switched on jury who can see all of the things that make no sense.

Lynn answered 1200 police questions, told no lies: defence

The prosecutor has asked the jury to reject as “fiction” accused killer Gregory Lynn’s claim the deaths were accidental.

www.theage.com.au

I could have sworn I read a comment earlier this evening on this thread asking why in his police interview Lynn was referring to the gun Hill allegedly took as a rifle when it was apparently the shotgun, but now I can’t find it and wondering if I’m going crazy lol

It made me wonder if perhaps something closer to the truth is that Russell actually did take the rifle from the car and Lynn came after him with the shotgun and shortly thereafter two people were lying dead on the ground.. JMO

 

[SouthAussie]

I could have sworn I read a comment earlier this evening on this thread asking why in his police interview Lynn was referring to the gun Hill allegedly took as a rifle when it was apparently the shotgun, but now I can’t find it and wondering if I’m going crazy lol

It made me wonder if perhaps something closer to the truth is that Russell actually did take the rifle from the car and Lynn came after him with the shotgun and shortly thereafter two people were lying dead on the ground.. JMO

Yes, I read that too. It was in The Age article. How Lynn repeatedly switched between Russell having the shotgun and having the rifle during evidence in his police interview and evidence in the witness box.

The prosecutor stated that at certain points the accused, who you might think is methodical and careful, falls down in his details.

Lynn answered 1200 police questions, told no lies: defence

The prosecutor has asked the jury to reject as “fiction” accused killer Gregory Lynn’s claim the deaths were accidental.

www.theage.com.au

 

[ProfCluezo]

Lynn’s account reminds me of a slightly older (and more disturbing) version of a teenager’s claim that “the dog ate my homework….”

 

[JBowie]

Lynn’s account reminds me of a slightly older (and more disturbing) version of a teenager’s claim that “the dog ate my homework….”

During his summing up, the prosecutor characterized Lynn's tale as: “A series of very unfortunate events, like the book series of that name, it is also complete fiction”.

[A Series of Unfortunate Events is a series of thirteen children's novels written by American author Daniel Handler under the pen name Lemony Snicket. The books follow the turbulent lives of orphaned siblings Violet, Klaus, and Sunny Baudelaire.]

 

[AussieIan]

Greg Lynn’s account of campers deaths a ‘fiction’ that ‘falls like a house of cards’, prosecutor tells murder trial

Closing arguments begin in trial of former pilot, who has pleaded not guilty to murdering Russell Hill and Carol Clay

www.theguardian.com

The only reasonable explanation for a former Jetstar pilot to cover up the deaths of two elderly campers in the Victorian high country was because “he knew he had murdered them”, the state’s supreme court has heard.

I'd be pissed if I was RH or CCs family that this is the best prosecution can bring, people cover up accidents all the time so they don't get in trouble, car accidents, workplace accidents, accidental ODs, like seriously

 

[JBowie]

I expect this one to take some time. I'm guessing that there will be two camps in the jury room: those who flat out don't believe Lynn and those who don't know what to believe. How many are in each camp is the question.

What muddies this for me is that there are two victims, seemingly shot at different times. I've pondered here before that the jury might have doubts about Hill's role in his own demise and possibly punt for manslaughter if that's allowed. (Do we have a report of the judge's instructions?)

IMO Clay is a different proposition. Lynn claims that Hill was responsible for her death. I believe the jury won't swallow that and could deliver a murder verdict in her case.

Alternatively, they may debate for days and not reach a majority on anything. Hung jury. Mistrial. Do it all over again with a new jury. Oy.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I think it's quite possible that the drone and Russell threatening to report him for shooting too close to the camp did not happen. I think he later got rid of the drone because he and his camp may have been caught on camera.
I still think that when Russell and Carol got there, GL was occupying the prime spot that Russell had chosen.

Am I remembering correctly that Russell had gone there the week before to get the spot ready.
I think it's likely that Russell asked GL to move to somewhere else.

And GL responded by staying put and trying to annoy Russell and Carol so they'd move somewhere else.
I believe the loud music was played to annoy them.
I believe that Russell went to GLs camp and told him to stop the noise, and maybe once again asked him to move.

I don't believe for a second that Russell got hold of GLs firearm.
I think GL lost his temper, got his firearm, followed GL back to his camp and shot both of them.
First Russell and then Carol, because she was a witness

Anyway that's my thoughts on what I think happened.
Oh and I don't believe there was a struggle for a weapon of any kind.

 

[Kemug]

It's certainly a tricky case. I've asked myself what I would have done in GL's shoes, however it had occurred. Well, first, panic! As I suspect most, if not all, of us would. Yes, pilots are trained not to panic, and in fact entrance tests are designed to try to weed out panickers. Doesn't mean that they never panic, IMO. Second, think "Has anyone seen my setup next to theirs?" If not, and I managed to overcome any urges to contact LE, then I think I would just get out of there as fast as I could. (Does anyone remember if anyone had seen their vehicles next to each other?) What I don't think i would do is to spend quite a lot of time "cleaning things up", then transporting their bodies far away, and then finally, months later, try to wipe them off the face of the earth. Those last steps seem seriously weird to me.

I think that when a jury is trying to decide on a case like this "beyond a reasonable doubt", what they are in fact thinking is "what would I have done?", "would/could I have done what he did?", "why would he do that?", and "is the reason he gave for his actions believable?" My own conclusion would be that no, I can't imagine that I could possibly have done what he did. I'm not even sure that his career came into it much - after all, he was currently laid off because of Covid, and how close was he to retirement anyway?

 

[Kemug]

Has he ever said that in hindsight he wishes that he had just gone to LE and told them how it happened? No? Thought not.

 

[ProfCluezo]

Has he ever said that in hindsight he wishes that he had just gone to LE and told them how it happened? No? Thought not.

Also, why be worried about going to police if the evidence would have clearly shown signs of the “struggle”(S) he purportedly had with both? The most obvious reason is because the story GL concocted is so far from what actually happened that GL could not afford to connect himself with the crime scene at all…

JMO

 

[SouthAussie]

Google says that it takes a minimum of 4 hours to get from Wonnangatta to Dargo. The best route takes 5½ hours.

Plenty of time there to re-think an unwise decision. Plenty of time for the 'panic' to subside.

Why Dargo? Did he overhear Russell's ham radio call where he discussed with his mate about going to Dargo?

I can't make heads or tails of his weird thinking. But it is very coincidental that Russell discussed over the airwaves going to Dargo, and that's where they were found.


Mr Ashlin said he had a lengthy conversation with Mr Hill on the evening of March 20 ....
“He wanted to go out the other way to Dargo and probably stop at Ollies Jump Up (another campground) … He knew I knew the way,” he said.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/greg-lynn-trial-camper-russell-hills-last-words-to-friend-rob-ashlin-before-alleged-murder/news-story/7f677d36a15c5159ac7150d84b281fab

 

[discostu]

Google says that it takes a minimum of 4 hours to get from Wonnangatta to Dargo. The best route takes 5½ hours.

Plenty of time there to re-think an unwise decision. Plenty of time for the 'panic' to subside.

Why Dargo? Did he overhear Russell's ham radio call where he discussed with his mate about going to Dargo?

I can't make heads or tails of his weird thinking. But it is very coincidental that Russell discussed over the airwaves going to Dargo, and that's where they were found.


Mr Ashlin said he had a lengthy conversation with Mr Hill on the evening of March 20 ....
“He wanted to go out the other way to Dargo and probably stop at Ollies Jump Up (another campground) … He knew I knew the way,” he said.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/greg-lynn-trial-camper-russell-hills-last-words-to-friend-rob-ashlin-before-alleged-murder/news-story/7f677d36a15c5159ac7150d84b281fab

It’s much further between the named townships but from Bucks Camp to Union Spur track it’s actually only around 2/2.5 hours. Still a long way to go to deposit bodies but I guess he was familiar with that area and thought it was remote enough to easily conceal them..?

 

[discostu]

Also, why be worried about going to police if the evidence would have clearly shown signs of the “struggle”(S) he purportedly had with both? The most obvious reason is because the story GL concocted is so far from what actually happened that GL could not afford to connect himself with the crime scene at all…

JMO

This is what I don’t get either.. I’m guessing that (if it actually happened like he says) he was concerned that there would be questions and he’d like get in trouble for not storing his guns safely which would then impact his ASIC license and his job..

But, i agree with @Kemug, if nobody could actually place him at Buck’s Camp except Russell and Carol then why wouldn’t he just pack up and leave every thing as it was..? Take the drone just in case and get out of there.. sure his gun would be linked to the crime but how would anyone connect it to him?

Does he have a criminal history that if his fingerprints were found at the scene they would come up in a database somewhere? Because otherwise I can’t understand his choices if it truely happened the way he tells it..

 

[SouthAussie]

Does he have a criminal history that if his fingerprints were found at the scene they would come up in a database somewhere? Because otherwise I can’t understand his choices if it truely happened the way he tells it..

Maybe this?

You must have a full set of fingerprints taken when applying for a:

• Category D Longarm Licence.
• Category E Longarm Licence.
• Category 1 Collectors Licence.
• General Category Handgun Licence.
• Category E Handgun Licence.
• Licensed Firearm Dealer Licence (all employees and close associates must be fingerprinted).

Apply for a new firearm licence

How to apply for a new firearm or gun licence in Victoria, and what you need to do to submit your application to Victoria Police.

www.police.vic.gov.au