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

[SouthAussie]

When he made his appeal he was still in Melbourne Assessment Prison.

I have been doing some reading, trying to understand what happens.
I guess Lynn was in the remand centre initially, until he was sentenced. Then he likely went to the assessment prison to be assessed for where they would place him. And it sounds (from that article) as if he is still there.

Maybe they have yet to decide on a placement, or things are running slow due to Christmas break or something else. Maybe Dermot Dann is trying to get him placed in a specific prison? Could be anything, I guess.

Lynn was sentenced in mid-October.


Melbourne Assessment Prison is a maximum security facility providing the primary statewide assessment and orientation services for male prisoners received into the prison system.
Where possible, prisoners with similar status, such as 'remanded' or 'sentenced', are accommodated together.

Melbourne Assessment Prison | Corrections Victoria

The information below is specific to the Melbourne Assessment Prison.

www.corrections.vic.gov.au

 

[Bats]

I have been doing some reading, trying to understand what happens.
I guess Lynn was in the remand centre initially, until he was sentenced. Then he likely went to the assessment prison to be assessed for where they would place him. And it sounds (from that article) as if he is still there.

Maybe they have yet to decide on a placement, or things are running slow due to Christmas break or something else. Maybe Dermot Dann is trying to get him placed in a specific prison? Could be anything, I guess.

Lynn was sentenced in mid-October.


Melbourne Assessment Prison is a maximum security facility providing the primary statewide assessment and orientation services for male prisoners received into the prison system.
Where possible, prisoners with similar status, such as 'remanded' or 'sentenced', are accommodated together.

Melbourne Assessment Prison | Corrections Victoria

The information below is specific to the Melbourne Assessment Prison.

www.corrections.vic.gov.au

I've been doing some reading too as it sounds a bit odd that he'd still be at the MAP. I just thought he would go straight to Barwon prison, where all the other male murderers go in Victoria.

One thing I noticed is that after sentencing and depending on the crime, an offender can sometimes apply for bail whilst they wait to see whether the appeal will be heard. It also sounds like this can be at the discretion of the magistrate, similar to pre-trial.

Perhaps in Greg's case justice Croucher has allowed him to stay put until the decision whether the appeal will be heard, has been made.
I'm only guessing this....

Appealing a Magistrates' Court decision

 

[Cliff Hardy]

The police identified Lynn as an 'apex liar'. Someone with a born instinct for knowing exactly what small details he had to adjust in a mountain of verifiable facts to allow the truth to escape unscathed.

Ref: In the Dead of Night by Greg Haddrick, page 123

That section in the book piqued my attention too.

The police were really up against it with Lynn and they had to be very clever the way they went about things.

That copper Dan Passingham, who came on board the case about a year in, certainly rejuvenated things with some lateral thinking.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

Can't imagine the frustration the police must have felt after they had put so much work into the '60 Minutes' segment, only for Channel 9 to run 'The Block' so far over time that Sunday night that Lynn and wife lost interest waiting for '60 Minutes' to start and went to bed.

Then, with the surveillance agreement about to expire and hoping Lynn and wife would watch '60 Minutes' on catch-up the next day, the police had to wait until the next Saturday before they actually got around to it.

You must have to have the patience of a saint and nerves of steel to be a good detective.

 

[SouthAussie]

That copper Dan Passingham, who came on board the case about a year in, certainly rejuvenated things with some lateral thinking.

Yes, Dan Passingham was pivotal in solving this case - and in getting Lynn to confess.

I suspect a lot of the inside information contained in Greg Haddrick's book came from Dan. There is information there that didn't come from transcripts and could have only come from an insider.

For those who are not aware ... Dan Passingham resigned from the police force late in 2023. He had given all he could to the investigation, considered the Greg Lynn interview some of his best work, only to have Dermot Dann and Justice Croucher label that work as appalling, oppressive and egregious. (Not to mention, also for Croucher to disallow all of Lynn's lies in the first hours of the interview to be heard at trial.)
Dan had had enough. (ref: pg 262 of In the Dead of Night)

imo

 

[Kegsfamily]

I have no problem with somebody claiming ' one item presented as fact is absolutely incorrect' but it needs to supported by details of what it is they are claiming is absolutely incorrect.

I know someone connected to the case and a point made about them is absolutely false. It’s not my place to state it here but I did contact the publisher to advise them.

 

[SouthAussie]

I know someone connected to the case and a point made about them is absolutely false. It’s not my place to state it here but I did contact the publisher to advise them.

I imagine it is about the children. There is an error in the book (on page 61) where it describes Lynn's children as having come from his and Melanie's previous marriages - whereas it has been published that one son was born to Lynn and Melanie. Link

Not an error that is important to the case.

imo

 

[Cliff Hardy]

I know someone connected to the case and a point made about them is absolutely false. It’s not my place to state it here but I did contact the publisher to advise them.

Why raise it here then?

 

[Kegsfamily]

The point I'm making is that not everything in the book is factual - some of it is made up. Not sure how much, and to what extent. So don't assume everything you read was absolutely proven.

 

[SouthAussie]

The point I'm making is that not everything in the book is factual - some of it is made up. Not sure how much, and to what extent. So don't assume everything you read was absolutely proven.

None of it is made up. The only thing that Greg Haddrick did was cast later recollections into the actual words that may have been said at the time. But they were still recollections of authentic opinions, doubts, decisions and reasoning.

Otherwise everything is directly from legal documents, from conversations between counsel and the bench, and from other conversations during the court process.

Greg explains this in the book's Afterward.

imo

 

[JBowie]

You must have to have the patience of a saint and nerves of steel to be a good detective.

Tenacity is paramount. Productive interviewing skill is fundamental along with the ability to read a suspect's body language.

It's instructive to watch videos of experienced detectives skillfully interviewing suspects, catching them in lies and eventually extracting confessions, all while keeping them from clamming up and playing the 'I want a lawyer' card.

 

[SouthAussie]

Lynn was provided with a lawyer (a Legal Aid solicitor) very quickly. She advised him to say "no comment" during his interview. Which, of course, he couldn't do very well. Lynn spoke with her multiple times.

The detectives even contacted the prosecutor's office because they were afraid they were holding Lynn too long. They were told to get a shuffle on, Lynn needed to be charged or released very soon.

Over 3 days Lynn was only interviewed for 6½ hours.

No wonder Dan Passingham felt so disillusioned by the judge's comments. They tried so hard to do things right. imo

ref: In the Dead of Night by Greg Haddrick

 

[JBowie]

She advised him to say "no comment" during his interview. Which, of course, he couldn't do very well.

I was quite surprised. I said here at the time of his arrest that he would likely say nothing and let the prosecution try to make a case. Had he remained silent, I think the crown would have been up against it.

However, I was forgetting that Machiavellian narcissists (borderline psychopaths) think that they are smarter than everyone else and need to take charge. His taking the stand during the trial is yet another example.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

The point I'm making is that not everything in the book is factual - some of it is made up. Not sure how much, and to what extent. So don't assume everything you read was absolutely proven.

I'd suggest you read the book before commenting any further on it. Refer in particular to the Afterword on pages 321 and 322. If you had actually read the book it would have been the last thing you read and surely still fresh in your mind.

 

[Kegsfamily]

I did read the book as soon as it came out. I read the afterword too. Which is why I take some of the information with a grain of salt.

 

[Kegsfamily]

For example:
Page 321

"In many cases I have cast these pieces of information as immediate exchanges, presenting them as dialogue within the narrative timeline of the book. The opinions, doubts, decisions and reasoning portrayed here are as authentic as I could make them. In some cases the specific dialogue has been recreated from court testimony, and in other cases it is imagined - a creative method of taking later recollections and casting them into the words that might have actually been said at that time."

So while the book is really interesting and brings to light much that was not made public, a lot of the most entertaining and informative parts come from very specific conversations, that were not part of court testimony, and rely on recollections that potentially could be flawed. But that does not take away from the fact that it is a fascinating book. I just think that to get some simple facts wrong suggests some more may not have been exactly as written.

 

[Trooper]

I did read the book as soon as it came out. I read the afterword too. Which is why I take some of the information with a grain of salt.

OK, then, You think none of us should read, or buy or borrow this book because ( at first, you warned us not to take any of it at face value, now it's just some of it is wrong,) so should we send the book back to the publishers? back to the library for re cataloguing?. should we wade thru it and make wild guesses about exactly which bit you think is false? are you going to expand at some further point into exactly which area of this book you find misleading? or is it just going to be vague, illdefined cryptic messages repeating the same mantra?

You could become a verified insider which would give some veracity to your claim.. that might assist.

 

[Trooper]

I just think that to get some simple facts wrong suggests some more may not have been exactly as written.

edited by me
Which Simple Facts? ( simple question, requiring the simplest answer, that is, which fact is wrong. ? not a huge ask...)

 

[Cedars]

Lynn was provided with a lawyer (a Legal Aid solicitor) very quickly. She advised him to say "no comment" during his interview. Which, of course, he couldn't do very well. Lynn spoke with her multiple times.

The detectives even contacted the prosecutor's office because they were afraid they were holding Lynn too long. They were told to get a shuffle on, Lynn needed to be charged or released very soon.

Over 3 days Lynn was only interviewed for 6½ hours.

No wonder Dan Passingham felt so disillusioned by the judge's comments. They tried so hard to do things right. imo

ref: In the Dead of Night by Greg Haddrick

I made have read this and forgotten - how did they find the remains?

 

[Kegsfamily]

After Greg was interviewed, the media was advised police were recommencing their search and within days the remains were found. It was just over a week from the initial arrest.