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.'

 

[Sir_Loin]

3. After Carol was shot and Lynn had his gun back, he emptied the chamber by discharging the remaining bullet/s in to the air

According to Captain Do-Right

Didn’t need to fire them. Could have just recycled the action to eject the unspent shells. Just another hole in his bullshit story.

 

[Kurve]

Didn’t need to fire them. Could have just recycled the action to eject the unspent shells. Just another hole in his bullshit story.

If he had a magazine attached to his 12 gauge, does that make it a semi-automatic shotgun?

 

[FrankGrimes]

Lynn's covering himself if a witness or witnesses appear with testimony of hearing three shots.

I'm thinking there was three shots.

wasnt it 5 shots? warning shot also? im tipping 1 to shoot drone then the rest to shoot russ and carol, covering himself with exact shots in case somebody heard the shots.

 

[Kurve]

wasnt it 5 shots? warning shot also? im tipping 1 to shoot drone then the rest to shoot russ and carol, covering himself with exact shots in case somebody heard the shots.

Could have been five, if I only recall the three.

 

[Sir_Loin]

If he had a magazine attached to his 12 gauge, does that make it a semi-automatic shotgun?

Not necessarily. If it was a semiautomatic he would need to be cat C or D licensed for it which I don’t think is likely

 

[Badd0g]

Not necessarily. If it was a semiautomatic he would need to be cat D licensed for it which I don’t think is likely

He had commissioner dispensation to own swords and other large bladed weapons, I wouldn't discount it.

Re the 3 shots: that's came from Lynn's own account.

 

[Terrafirma]

Not necessarily. If it was a semiautomatic he would need to be cat D licensed for it which I don’t think is likely

He was a long time member of a Melbourne Shooting Club but I didn't read much about this deer hunting conquests was he a very keen deer hunter.? Also the shotgun is not the method for shooting deer and he would know that being a gun enthusiast. So if he was deer hunting for real he would have used a rifle of some description not a shotgun, so why was he carrying a loaded shotgun? Really begs the question how many guns were in his possession at the time why the use of a shotgun? Surely the prosecution would use this to insinuate different guns for different purposes. If your wanting to kill people in a confined area shotgun makes sense. Lot's of ?????? marks in this one IMO

 

[Badd0g]

Yeah 100% Hill not backing down or being aggressive towards Lynn is highly probable. Also highly probable is the fact Hill knows Lynn has guns especially if the version of not liking hunting is true and so surely Hill has to be careful of pushing a guy to the limit. I also think it's obvious Lynn would have hated feeling bullied into retreating back to his car a lost man. Off course it's also possible Lynn wasn't hunting at the time and simply wanted the drone to go away so shot it down (testimony suggests Lynn is trying to justify multiple gunshots with the belief campers heard these). The hunting story is a great one if you trying to justify Hill was the provoker.

Personally I'm of the opinion from what I have read about them so far (all hearsay of course) is that both of them wouldn't consider backing down from a confrontation. Carol probably did tell Russell to stop it, but I'm sure the context was likely different from the account we've heard.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Personally I'm of the opinion from what I have read about them so far (all hearsay of course) is that both of them wouldn't consider backing down from a confrontation. Carol probably did tell Russell to stop it, but I'm sure the context was likely different from the account we've heard.

Once one of them had been shot - likely it was Carol - there was no point going on with it. In fact it would have been lunacy. After tending to Carol to see if there was any chance of helping her, next thing to do would be to get away, or head for the radio.

 

[Kurve]

He was a long time member of a Melbourne Shooting Club but I didn't read much about this deer hunting conquests was he a very keen deer hunter.? Also the shotgun is not the method for shooting deer and he would know that being a gun enthusiast. So if he was deer hunting for real he would have used a rifle of some description not a shotgun, so why was he carrying a loaded shotgun? Really begs the question how many guns were in his possession at the time why the use of a shotgun? Surely the prosecution would use this to insinuate different guns for different purposes. If your wanting to kill people in a confined area shotgun makes sense. Lot's of ?????? marks in this one IMO

Sometimes they use shotguns for deer, usually with solid slugs I've realised. I'm not sure of the ideal range to kill a deer if I imagine it's less than if using a high powered rifle.

I'm no expert though, I've only seen shotguns used with pellets for target shooting and they're messy. The family are hunters but I've never been allowed to go. Banned!

 

[EagleEyes1]

wasnt it 5 shots? warning shot also? im tipping 1 to shoot drone then the rest to shoot russ and carol, covering himself with exact shots in case somebody heard the shots.

Could have been any number of shots as it’s Lynn’s version. He was out hunting that day so it may be way more than 3. But if he’s covering for any witnesses that may have heard the shots he may be truthful when he said 3 shots. Only thing is I don’t believe there were any warning shots. I believe Lynn came back at dark and shot both Hill and Clay while they were sitting at their campsite. Hence why the campsite and parts of the ute canopy were burnt.

IMO

 

[fargo in dargo]

Hello all. Long time lurker, first time poster. Everyone here is of the opinion that Lynn blew the drone out of the sky, or hell, even shot the drone when it was on the ground. Whatever. But forensics have never recovered ANY bits or shards from the drone? Really? But forensics find a shot gun pellet with Carols DNA and a fragment of her skull at the campsite. No way Lynn is finding ALL the bits of plastic and metal of a blown apart drone in the dark as he is covering up. And those bits would be still at the campsite, as per the skull fragment. So where is the drone bits? Or have I missed something? There may well have been an aurguement over the drone, I have no issue with that, but I dont think the drone was shot out of the sky. There WOULD be bits of it spread over the ground. Surely????

 

[Awakening]

Hello all. Long time lurker, first time poster. Everyone here is of the opinion that Lynn blew the drone out of the sky, or hell, even shot the drone when it was on the ground. Whatever. But forensics have never recovered ANY bits or shards from the drone? Really? But forensics find a shot gun pellet with Carols DNA and a fragment of her skull at the campsite. No way Lynn is finding ALL the bits of plastic and metal of a blown apart drone in the dark as he is covering up. And those bits would be still at the campsite, as per the skull fragment. So where is the drone bits? Or have I missed something? There may well have been an aurguement over the drone, I have no issue with that, but I dont think the drone was shot out of the sky. There WOULD be bits of it spread over the ground. Surely????

Excellent point. He must of taken it and destroyed it elsewhere.

The other thing I wonder about is after the deaths of Hill and Clay why didn’t he use the radio in Hills car? I would think pilots are familiar with them.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Hello all. Long time lurker, first time poster. Everyone here is of the opinion that Lynn blew the drone out of the sky, or hell, even shot the drone when it was on the ground. Whatever. But forensics have never recovered ANY bits or shards from the drone? Really? But forensics find a shot gun pellet with Carols DNA and a fragment of her skull at the campsite. No way Lynn is finding ALL the bits of plastic and metal of a blown apart drone in the dark as he is covering up. And those bits would be still at the campsite, as per the skull fragment. So where is the drone bits? Or have I missed something? There may well have been an aurguement over the drone, I have no issue with that, but I dont think the drone was shot out of the sky. There WOULD be bits of it spread over the ground. Surely????

That’s right. But he may have shot at it, and Hill brought it back and Lynn may have attempted to seize it, leading to the struggle, during which the gun went off again, killing Carol accidentally. After that, lots of things could have happened but whatever, Hill ended up dead. Simple matter for Lynn to pick up the drone and dispose of it later.

 

[GrayRanga]

From the reading of published reports of the alleged crime, it appears that the drone (or components of it; rotors, motors or plastics) have never been found.

It has become a trope in the forum (to which I have contributed) that the drone was shot from the air because Hill was using it to harass Lynn prior to the firing of the shots.

Where is the evidence of this?

Hill was flying the drone earlier in the day and he did use it to observe people in real time and evidence has been led to this effect.

In his Record Of Interview, I understand that Lynn stated that Hill advised him that he had footage of Lynn using his weapon in a dangerous manner (firing across roads or open ground where people or vehicles could be moving?)

Makes sense to a lay person why Hill could be exercising due dilligence to bring this to Lynn's attention, but it would be up to the prosecution to make the judgement of whether this should be led into evidence

There is no independent witnesses which have testified, to date, of the timeframe of the alleged offender's or the victim's actions of that day.

On the evidence led to date, the Court is relying on Lynn's ROI to a possible time frame of the events of the day.

Provide enough information from expert witness testimony which conflicts his ROI, the jury may form the opinion that Lynn's ROI timeframe and actions do not meet the entry level of reasonable doubt.

If the entry level of reasonable doubt is removed, the whole ROI can fall flat on its face.

Remember, that in almost evey case where a Record Of Interview is admitted into evidence without subsequent cross examination, the Judge, in his/her directions to the jury, will note that the contents of the ROI have not been tested and therefore should be viewed accordingly

 

[Badd0g]

From the reading of published reports of the alleged crime, it appears that the drone (or components of it; rotors, motors or plastics) have never been found.

It has become a trope in the forum (to which I have contributed) that the drone was shot from the air because Hill was using it to harass Lynn prior to the firing of the shots.

Where is the evidence of this?

Hill was flying the drone earlier in the day and he did use it to observe people in real time and evidence has been led to this effect.

The reason I think it is involved is that GL has specifically mentioned it was flying above the campsite when he returned. Why would he mention it if it wasn't relevant?
He also led police to the spot where he dumped the phones a d keys in the river and by his own admission burnt the drone.
Was that purely to get rid of something that belonged to the pair? If so, that far away from the scene and you'd think throwing it I to dense bush would be enough. But he burnt it... You've gotta ask why. Did it contain footage or was it damaged?

Someone raised there being debris from a downed drone.. It may not have been directly overhead and therefore outside of the fine tooth comb search of the campsite.

 

[Kurve]

That’s right. But he may have shot at it, and Hill brought it back and Lynn may have attempted to seize it, leading to the struggle, during which the gun went off again, killing Carol accidentally. After that, lots of things could have happened but whatever, Hill ended up dead. Simple matter for Lynn to pick up the drone and dispose of it later.

The prosecution's showed some caution in not making claims they can't prove but they appear to be clear that Hill was killed first.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

The prosecution's showed some caution in not making claims they can't prove but they appear to be clear that Hill was killed first.

If that’s the case, Carol must have been murdered. I can’t see her coming at Lynn with any kind of weapon. IMO

 

[Kurve]

Was that purely to get rid of something that belonged to the pair? If so, that far away from the scene and you'd think throwing it I to dense bush would be enough. But he burnt it... You've gotta ask why

Lynn's plan wasn't to deny he was actually in the valley at some point if he was questioned IMO, he admitted to Melanie he was only in the area for four hours.

Drone footage or imagery taken by Hill or Clay, would have proved that he was at Bucks Camp at the same time they were and presumably the last person to see them alive. It puts him square in the frame.

 

[Kurve]

If that’s the case, Carol must have been murdered. I can’t see her coming at Lynn with any kind of weapon. IMO

Carol might have gone for him with a weapon realising Lynn has killed Russell but that's not in question, assuming she'd find one if chucking a chair at him or boiling water in circumstances of being hunted down with a gun, would be better than a knife where she'd have to get real close.

I think Carol was shot shielding herself behind the car or the open car door, head down trying to reach for the radio. Poor Carol, she wouldn't have got far trying to make a run for it through the bush.

Edit: And I'm thinking the shot came from the front of Russell's ute, not the rear as Lynn seems to have indicated. Which is even more awful because it might look like Lynn tried to sneak up on her using the bush and the toilet as cover.

 

[Irma]

I wonder if maybe the reason R&C camped so close to GL was that during those pleasantries exchanged on the 19th maybe GL said he would be leaving on the Saturday or Sunday, so R&C lite-camped quite close by so as not to have too far to go to relocate to R’s ‘favourite’ spot after GL departed? C had told family/friends that she’d be away until the 29th, so it’s possible they intended to settle into the valley for at least a week? So why not spend it in the prime spot if it were possibly being vacated soon.

Also, re the idea floating around that music being turned up was to try and cover any gunshots - If the nearest campers, the weed-sprayers were camped 3km away, I’m not convinced they’d have been able to hear the music, especially if it’s only coming from a car stereo. We live in a valley, and our nearest neighbour in any direction is around 1km+. We can hear the music when there’s a party going on, turned up loud, not quite crystal clear but enough that on a clear night we can usually ID the song.

Out of interest I measured where 3km down the valley, and up on the hills as the crow flies would be, we’ve definitely never been able to hear music from that far away, but we have heard gunshots from that distance on clear nights. I dunno, just basing it on my own experiences here, but I reckon at that distance there’s no way music would drown out gunshots.

Just some Saturday afternoon musings.

 

[GrayRanga]

The reason I think it is involved is that GL has specifically mentioned it was flying above the campsite when he returned. Why would he mention it if it wasn't relevant?
He also led police to the spot where he dumped the phones a d keys in the river and by his own admission burnt the drone.
Was that purely to get rid of something that belonged to the pair? If so, that far away from the scene and you'd think throwing it I to dense bush would be enough. But he burnt it... You've gotta ask why. Did it contain footage or was it damaged?

Someone raised there being debris from a downed drone.. It may not have been directly overhead and therefore outside of the fine tooth comb search of the campsite.

No problems with that theory.

However, has there has never been any evidence led about when Lynn arrived back in camp. When did he observe the flying drone; was is when he was committing the "illegal" hunting and he had the confrontation when he arrived back in camp earlier than he said in the ROI, possibly immediately after being spied in by the drone?

I believe that the ROI may contain some elements of truth, but the timeframe may be contracted or expanded to suit his own narrative.

The limited experience I've had with drones are that they are bloody noisy; a hunter carefully stalkimg a target to get a clean fatal shot would be acutely aware of any extraneous man made noise, as may the hunted

Spin his story 90 degrees. Lynn arrives back in camp angry about a drone flying over where he is hunting (lost target?), he confronts Hill who says you were hunting illegally and explains about his relative and how he dislikes hunters

Hill finally tells him to eff off with the rider that I'm going to take the footage to the police

That may hve happened mid afternoon ... Lynn is the only live witness left

The drone and memory card were destroyed because it has footage of the "illegal" hunting probably time stamped

 

[Kurve]

The DJI Mavic has night vision, the DJI Mavic 3 has a thermal camera.

If Hill knows that valley like the back of his hand, he'd be quite confident flying his drone at night imo.

 

[Kurve]

Are we thinking Lynn might have been away from his camp hunting illegally when Hill and Clay actually first arrived and started setting up? Because that was an opportunity for Lynn to say 'Hi. You might be a bit close mate, this is a big valley.'

Hill might have caught something on his drone the night before but hasn't said anything until the next evening?

 

[Run n Spread]

No

He has been held in custody on a remand warrant legally issued by a Court after due consideration of all the evidence given by both the Prosecution and the Defence in any bail applcations

His liberty is not being denied by an arbitrary decision of the prison authorities, the police, any Government agency or private organisation. Habius Corpus does therefore not apply

This is not a civil matter where they can claim damages, this a criminal matter.

If he is aquitted he will be taken back to the prison he was held on remand, given his belongings and paid out any prison monies owed and shown the Front Gate

(PS edit...If he is convicted and sentenced to the rising of the Court, he would be a free man as soon as the Justice left the Bench)

What do you mean to the rising of the court?