Current Trial Wonnangatta - Murders of Russell Hill & Carol Clay *Pilot Greg Lynn Pleads Not Guilty

[Kurve]

MOD NOTICE

This case is sub judice as under consideration by the courts. Sub judice contempt can occur if information is published that may be prejudicial to the court proceedings.

Please do not state as fact that which is opinion. Also, use 'IMO' and 'allegedly' a lot.

Rules - Updated Crime Board Rules - READ BEFORE POSTING​

General Information The BigFooty Crime board is a community that fosters discussion on current and past crimes, some which have social and media notoriety, that attracts the attention of public opinion and discussion on such matters. Please read these rules very carefully, both the Big Footy...

www.bigfooty.com



Disappearance of Barwon Prison Boss David Prideaux - High Country Mount Stirling
Hit and Run Death of Bryce Airs - High Country Jamieson

Israel Keyes

On the Greg Lynn committal proceedings Crown Prosecutor Mr Dickie said 'It is clear hopefully from the document, and if it's not clear from the document it's clear hopefully from the charges put before the court, that it is alleged of course that the accused acted with murderous intent when he allegedly killed the two victims.'

 

[Zidane98]

His story appears a crock of s**t but he is entitled to presumption of.innocence and due process.
Forensics on the mirror key. Would be able to tell bullet trajectory and based on shooting stance and his height and Carol's height whether a ricochet is possible.
Prosecution will also try and put holes in his timeline (speed cameras and route to try disprove his story)
Had no choice to speak to the cops as was caught red handed. Spinning an early story gives best chance.
He is going to have to testify imo
No way round it. The prosecution will have time dates position remains. Even be able to extrapolate how close a shot would be to leave fragments.
He'll have to get up and hope his story sticks under cross

This isn't true. He could have remained silent, not given up the location of the remains of the couple. That was his legal right.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Don't see how a manslaughter conviction sticks based on defence argument.
Maybe for Carol as it was wreckless going after a gun etc but he argued hills finger on the trigger.
The knife story = self defence
And lawyer going not guilty on both opening
Either murder or naught imo.

He's made up a story that he hopes the jury will buy. It's the lawyer's job to push that story.

I don't think they will buy it.

IMO

 

[Zidane98]

Don't see how a manslaughter conviction sticks based on defence argument.
Maybe for Carol as it was wreckless going after a gun etc but he argued hills finger on the trigger.
The knife story = self defence
And lawyer going not guilty on both opening
Either murder or naught imo.

Let's say RH & GL really did fight over the gun and CC was killed as a result of this fight. Even if at that stage both parties stopped their argument completely, called police and waited for their arrival GL & RH would then both be guilty of manslaughter simply because of their reckless actions fighting over the gun. As is the case RH didn't survive but that doesn't change GL's culpability from his claimed story anyway so at the very least he still must go down for manslaughter surely.

 

[Zidane98]

He's made up a story that he hopes the jury will buy. It's the lawyer's job to push that story.

I don't think they will buy it.

Will they buy the prosecution story is the more important question. That's what will secure a conviction.

 

[Run n Spread]

This isn't true. He could have remained silent, not given up the location of the remains of the couple. That was his legal right.

True. And stayed schtum till the prosecution lay their cards.
What I mean was he was gone dead to right. Police alleged he was in the area caught returning to a set area changed vehicle etc. Cadaver dogs out and only a matter of time before thwir found.
Probably advised to get on the front foot early and come up with a story before bodies were found.
At least this way he has a fighting chance if his story can hold against forensics. I led them to the bodies I panicked this is what happened.
The right to silent is a right that should mostly be used imo.
But say your DNA is at the scene a weapon is found at your house you dam sure would want an explanation

 

[Run n Spread]

Let's say RH & GL really did fight over the gun and CC was killed as a result of this fight. Even if at that stage both parties stopped their argument completely, called police and waited for their arrival GL & RH would then both be guilty of manslaughter simply because of their reckless actions fighting over the gun. As is the case RH didn't survive but that doesn't change GL's culpability from his claimed story anyway so at the very least he still must go down for manslaughter surely.

Yes. But Lynn can claim he shot in the air and was threatening me/ he pointed the gun at me i was scared it would go off as he was acting crazy. I was in fear of my life qe fought his finger was on the trigger.
This is a bit like Gatto/Venamin.
The accused controls the crime scene and can see then set up and create a narrative to fit. In this case all evidence is destroyed moved so harder to disprove the story.
Gatto could've been done on manslaughter it was dangerous to wrestle a gun but jury bought self defence

 

[GreyCrow]

The radio in all cars is always located on the driver's side of the vehicle. This does not conflate with the passenger side mirror being blown off in the scenario where CC was allegedly trying to call for help on the radio.

Was their some commentary around Hill being the dominant partner in the relationship?

I can see where Clay would automatically go to the passenger side door out of habit.

I'm not sure I would head for the drivers door of one of my mates car in most circumstances

 

[Kurve]

I'd love to see the forensics on the mirror and the vehicle for evidence of a bullet. Is that a possible bullet entry point near where the canopy and body join at window sill height?

IMO initially the cops thought it was a disappearance, there's no reason for them to not launch a homicide investigation if that's what they believe happened at the time. It would have helped find Lynn much earlier, possibly before he sold the trailer etc etc and made it easier to gather up evidence.

They'd have to rule them simply getting lost and an opportunistic ransacking of the campsite out before all that, including whether they were looking for one body and one on the run after a domestic argument.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Will they buy the prosecution story is the more important question. That's what will secure a conviction.

I think the prosecution's case will be based on the balance of probabilities, backed up by evidence. It's impossible to take Lynn's word for what happened, particularly after the subsequent attempts of concealment.

He should have put the gun in Hill's hand, rushed to the nearest police station and spun a different story, that Hill grabbed his gun from the back of the car and Lynn armed himself with a knife, grappled with Hill, the gun went off and Clay was killed, Lynn had to stab Hill (that's if he hadn't shot him), then ran off. He might have got away with it. Instead...

 

[Zidane98]

I think the prosecution's case will be based on the balance of probabilities, backed up by evidence. It's impossible to take Lynn's word for what happened, particularly after the subsequent attempts of concealment.

He should have put the gun in Hill's hand, rushed to the nearest police station and spun a different story, that Hill grabbed his gun from the back of the car and Lynn armed himself with a knife, grappled with Hill, the gun went off and Clay was killed, Lynn had to stab Hill (that's if he hadn't shot him), then ran off. He might have got away with it. Instead...

Balance of probabilities isn't enough to secure a conviction from my knowledge of the justice system.


The prosecution will have to convince the jury beyond reasonable doubt of their version of events to secure a murder conviction.

 

[Zidane98]

Was their some commentary around Hill being the dominant partner in the relationship?

I can see where Clay would automatically go to the passenger side door out of habit.

I'm not sure I would head for the drivers door of one of my mates car in most circumstances

Purely talking from a point of view that CC was trying to get on the radio to call for help and was shot in the process of doing so. That doesn't conflate with going to the passenger side of the car to complete such an action.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Balance of probabilities isn't enough to secure a conviction from my knowledge of the justice system.


The prosecution will have to convince the jury beyond reasonable doubt of their version of events to secure a murder conviction.

Chris Dawson was convicted on balance of probabilities. No body, no proof.

 

[Zidane98]

Yes. But Lynn can claim he shot in the air and was threatening me/ he pointed the gun at me i was scared it would go off as he was acting crazy. I was in fear of my life qe fought his finger was on the trigger.
This is a bit like Gatto/Venamin.
The accused controls the crime scene and can see then set up and create a narrative to fit. In this case all evidence is destroyed moved so harder to disprove the story.
Gatto could've been done on manslaughter it was dangerous to wrestle a gun but jury bought self defence

Even in that case his reckless actions have caused the death of an innocent bystander. I don't see how he can escape that.

Difference with Gatto was the other party was killed in the alteraction that he was allegedly wrestling with. I daresay if an innocent 3rd party was kiilled as the result of his actions he would have gone down for manslaughter.

 

[Zidane98]

Chris Dawson was convicted on balance of probabilities. No body, no proof.

Judge only trial, not comparable in reality.

 

[GreyCrow]

Purely talking from a point of view that CC was trying to get on the radio to call for help and was shot in the process of doing so. That doesn't conflate with going to the passenger side of the car to complete such an action.

My mates radio is in the middle of the fascia - I would go for the passenger door

I imagine Clay heads to passenger side opens door - window open - Lynn comes around the back of the vehicle and shoots - hitting Clay AND the mirror

I cant see a shot going through drivers side without leaving other evidence inside vehicle

 

[Kurve]

Don't see how a manslaughter conviction sticks based on defence argument.
Maybe for Carol as it was wreckless going after a gun etc but he argued hills finger on the trigger.
The knife story = self defence
And lawyer going not guilty on both opening
Either murder or naught imo.

I don't know how this is going to play out but I suspect the prosecution is going to suggest that Hill was killed at Lynn's campsite after a confrontation. Given Russell's temperament and known for not backing down, which will probably get further attention, it might be enough to convict of manslaughter. The jury might buy it.

If they do buy it, they will convict of Carol's murder because there was no reason to kill her unless it was to despatch with the witness.

 

[Zidane98]

My mates radio is in the middle of the fascia - I would go for the passenger door

I imagine Clay heads to passenger side opens door - window open - Lynn comes around the back of the vehicle and shoots - hitting Clay AND the mirror

I cant see a shot going through drivers side without leaving other evidence inside vehicle

Clearly there was no shot from the drivers side, that much is obvious. Radios are usually accessible to the driver in most instances. Maybe not the case in RH's vehicle but in my experience (I am a 4WD enthusiast) radios are usually placed in a location easily accessible to the driver.

Key is establishing where the bullet travelled and how it killed CC. In the scenario you propose I'd expect the bullet to end up lodged in the car though.

 

[Zidane98]

True. And stayed schtum till the prosecution lay their cards.
What I mean was he was gone dead to right. Police alleged he was in the area caught returning to a set area changed vehicle etc. Cadaver dogs out and only a matter of time before thwir found.
Probably advised to get on the front foot early and come up with a story before bodies were found.
At least this way he has a fighting chance if his story can hold against forensics. I led them to the bodies I panicked this is what happened.
The right to silent is a right that should mostly be used imo.
But say your DNA is at the scene a weapon is found at your house you dam sure would want an explanation

They weren't finding the remains without him telling them where they are and without the remains a conviction would be quite difficult IMO. All of their searches were in the Wonnangatta valley area prior to police questioning GL. - a 3 hr drive away.

The only thing linking him to the disappearance was the image of his vehicle travelling through Hotham resort cameras the next day.

 

[EagleEyes1]

I feel like forensics on the car's mirror are key here. I expect the prosecution would be working on debunking the bullet deflection story. Once the bullet deflection story is dismantled GL's story starts to fall apart.

I do see a few issues with your theories though. The radio in all cars is always located on the driver's side of the vehicle. This does not conflate with the passenger side mirror being blown off in the scenario where CC was allegedly trying to call for help on the radio. Was it the passenger mirror that was blown off? Also, what is the bullet's trajectory after it had passed through CC? If it hit her first, then destroyed the mirror, surely the most likely trajectory afterwards is it being lodged in the vehicle.

One would imagine if a bullet was discovered lodged in the vehicle that the police would immediately have declared the disappearance a homicide but that did not happen with the case being initially treated as a disappearance.

Ballistics and forensics are the key.

The ballistics on a shot gun need to focus on proximity to the target and spread of pellets. Given the pathology report that Clay's upper skull and jaw were intact, however missing the middle of her skull indicates that there was little spead of the pellets from the shoty. Clay was most likely shot at point blank range.

Lynn stating that the round went through the passenger side mirror and struck her on the side of the head is questionable. If the the round went through the mirror then struck Clay at point blank range there would be blood and bone everwhere and over the car. Furthermore how was Clay shot on the side of the head if she was facing them trying to stop a fight or struggle over a gun? Lynn's story does not add up.

Forensic evidence of Clay's head fragments being found 20-30m away does not agree to Lynn's story. If there was remains of Clay's head that far away and she was shot at point blank range then most likely Lynn chased and gunned her down after killing Hill first.

 

[Zidane98]

Anyone got info on how high the mirror off the ground would be on a 79 series land cruiser?

I say this because in the scenario where GL allegedly shoots CC when she is attempting to reach inside the vehicle to call for help on the radio and then takes out the mirror after passing through that would surely on be possible by her being shot from a position above.

I don't have CC's exact height but imagine it would be significantly greater than wing mirror height on a 79 series Land Cruiser.

 

[Zidane98]

Ballistics and forensics are the key.

The ballistics on a shot gun need to focus on proximity to the target and spread of pellets. Given the pathology report that Clay's upper skull and jaw were intact, however missing the middle of her skull indicates that there was little spead of the pellets from the shoty. Clay was most likely shot at point blank range.

Lynn stating that the round went through the passenger side mirror and struck her on the side of the head is questionable. If the the round went through the mirror then struck Clay at point blank range there would be blood and bone everwhere and over the car. Furthermore how was Clay shot on the side of the head if she was facing them trying to stop a fight or struggle over a gun? Lynn's story does not add up.

Forensic evidence of Clay's head fragments being found 20-30m away does not agree to Lynn's story. If there was remains of Clay's head that far away and she was shot at point blank range then most likely Lynn chased and gunned her down after killing Hill first.

That's a good point but this doesn't explain the shotgun damage to the mirror which appears definitely to be there.

 

[faible]

Anyone got info on how high the mirror off the ground would be on a 79 series land cruiser?

I say this because in the scenario where GL allegedly shoots CC when she is attempting to reach inside the vehicle to call for help on the radio and then takes out the mirror after passing through that would surely on be possible by her being shot from a position above.

I don't have CC's exact height but imagine it would be significantly greater than wing mirror height on a 79 series Land Cruiser.

They're a fairly standard 4WD height, so walk up to whatever the next 4WD you see is that isn't on huge lifts or an F150 style thing and that's about how high.

I'd have said if she was a smaller older woman it's not 'that' far away from her head height.

 

[Zidane98]

They're a fairly standard 4WD height, so walk up to whatever the next 4WD you see is that isn't on huge lifts or an F150 style thing and that's about how high.

I'd have said if she was a smaller older woman it's not 'that' far away from her head height.

The one thing I can't seem to find is CC's height and GL's height to test this theory. It should be pretty easy to test if all variables are known.

 

[Terrafirma]

Will they buy the prosecution story is the more important question. That's what will secure a conviction.

Story but will need appropriate evidence to get the murder conviction. Ballistics etc. It maybe near impossible to disprove Lynn's version of events via Ballistics/Forensics etc. What other evidence can they present. One part I query is defence said Hill approached Lynn and stole his gun and confrontation took place at Lynn's campsite. Then why was Clay shot at her campsite next to vehicle etc?

 

[Zidane98]

Story but will need appropriate evidence to get the murder conviction. Ballistics etc. It maybe near impossible to disprove Lynn's version of events via Ballistics/Forensics etc. What other evidence can they present. One part I query is defence said Hill approached Lynn and stole his gun and confrontation took place at Lynn's campsite. Then why was Clay shot at her campsite next to vehicle etc?

Did they? I'll have to read the article again. I thought the defense story was RH took the gun from GL's vehicle, discharged it into the air and took it back to his campsite. GL then claimed to approach RH to take the gun back off him, an alleged struggled ensued at RH/CC's campsite followed by the alleged weapon being discharged / claimed ricohet killing CC instantly.


My reading is GL then claimed he fired the last round in the chamber into the air, went back to his car and put the weapon away to be confronted by RH in a rage coming at him with a knife.

To me, the defense is agreeing with the fact that CC was killed by a shotgun bullet at their campsite. Prosecution also agrees, they differ on when it happened. Defence saying it happened first, prosecution saying it happened after RH's death for which they have as yet to offer a theory on how he was killed.