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

[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

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]

It's more complex and nuanced than this.

What's complex about it?


Law:

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/4a03fae7-bea1-3082-adea-acaa473530a4_99-21aa040%20authorised.pdf

Of note

d) to a communication or publication made by a
law enforcement officer—
(i) to a person authorised by the chief
officer of the law enforcement agency
and for the purpose of investigating or
prosecuting an offence; or


Basically, to record a conversation the other party has to be officially under investigation. Only the police know if they have the paperwork that he was in July 2020. My understanding is the conversation was an informal one only and at the time GL was not yet considered to be a suspect.

 

[Zidane98]

Thanks.

Hard to believe police didn't apply for a warrant in this case.

From all testimony GL did not appear to be a suspect at the time in July 2020. Police would have made numerous enquiries with people who were found to have been in the area the weekend of the disappearance.

 

[jason_recliner]

What's complex about it?


Law:

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/4a03fae7-bea1-3082-adea-acaa473530a4_99-21aa040%20authorised.pdf

Of note

d) to a communication or publication made by a
law enforcement officer—
(i) to a person authorised by the chief
officer of the law enforcement agency
and for the purpose of investigating or
prosecuting an offence; or


Basically, to record a conversation the other party has to be officially under investigation. Only the police know if they have the paperwork that he was in July 2020. My understanding is the conversation was an informal one only and at the time GL was not yet considered to be a suspect.

You stated it's "against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party unless... there is a warrant" and are now referencing a specific type and of communication and circustance.

 

[10571z]

I suppose we believe there was some altercation. Most murders aren’t just random and unplanned as this seems.

I think he can get off of his lawyers are good.

 

[Zidane98]

It is not against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party. I recently had a situation where I had to do this and I told the police. They told me that as long as one member of the party being recorded had consented to the recording it was not illegal. This was between me and a second party... I was the consenting member. Recording is not illegal. What might be illegal is using it as evidence or publishing it.

Interesting you were given that advice by police. While there is nowhere that explicitly says you can't record a conversation with another party there are explicit regulations that say listening devices cannot be installed or used to monitor or record a conversation without permission from all parties apart from those excluded from doing so under law.

Further to this the contents of any such recording is against the law without the permission of both parties.

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/4a03fae7-bea1-3082-adea-acaa473530a4_99-21aa040%20authorised.pdf

I don't know the circumstance of who you and the other party are but in the case that both of you don't fall out of the list of parties excluded (IBAC employees, gaming industry, law enforcement officer body cameras in public places etc) I would suggest you would have serious legal issues if you admitting to the use of a listening device without informing the other party.

 

[EagleEyes1]

This article provided by SirLoin which we must have missed prior, raises the question of where the shot was taken from.

Leading Sen Con Paul Griffiths tested whether it was possible that if two men wrestled at the bonnet of a Toyota Landcruiser for control of a shotgun, and the muzzle of the weapon was pointed towards the rear, that it could accidentally discharge, firing a shot through the passenger side rear mirror, and striking a person in the head who was positioned near the rear passenger side wheel of the vehicle.
He tested whether the person who was shot could be standing, crouching, or stooping, finding the scenarios ranged from plausible to highly unlikely.

Court grants suppression order for evidence in accused Victoria campsite killer case | Victoria | The Guardian

Ruling prevents publication of material from covert recording of Greg Lynn taken by police in July 2020, a statement, and interview in November

amp.theguardian.com

If there was a struggle at the front of the car then how was Clay telling them to stop from the rear passenger side of the car?
If a shot was fired and hit the side mirror, there would be fragments of the mirror everywhere. There are no fragments unless Lynn had a vacuum cleaner and picked up every single bit in the dark.
Furthermore ballistic analysis will show that bullets or pellets hitting any object will not continue its straight path. The pellets would have tumbled and taken random trajectories going in different directions. We do not see any evidence of this within the incident. Clay was shot in the side of the head whilst telling them to stop the argument which is bizarre and her dna fragments were found under the canopy which proves she was not standing when she was killed. Forensic analysis proves she was shot at point blank range with zero pellet spread i.e. she was executed.

IMO

 

[Kurve]

If there was a struggle at the front of the car then how was Clay telling them to stop from the rear passenger side of the car?
If a shot was fired and hit the side mirror, there would be fragments of the mirror everywhere. There are no fragments unless Lynn had a vacuum cleaner and picked up every single bit in the dark.
Furthermore ballistic analysis will show that bullets or pellets hitting any object will not continue its straight path. The pellets would have tumbled and taken random trajectories going in different directions. We do not see any evidence of this within the incident. Clay was shot in the side of the head whilst telling them to stop the argument which is bizarre and her dna fragments were found under the canopy which proves she was not standing when she was killed. Forensic analysis proves she was shot at point blank range with zero pellet spread i.e. she was executed.

IMO

Is it confirmed Lynn was using pellets/buckshot? We're thinking he was probably using solid lead slugs.

IF the bullet hit the mirror in the centre it would go straight through it and continue on its trajectory, losing a bit of force but not of huge significance.

If the bullet clipped or skimmed the frame, it might impact on trajectory, minimally on force.

Imo

On SM-G998B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[LeChatNoir]

Interesting you were given that advice by police. While there is nowhere that explicitly says you can't record a conversation with another party there are explicit regulations that say listening devices cannot be installed or used to monitor or record a conversation without permission from all parties apart from those excluded from doing so under law.

Further to this the contents of any such recording is against the law without the permission of both parties.

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/4a03fae7-bea1-3082-adea-acaa473530a4_99-21aa040%20authorised.pdf

I don't know the circumstance of who you and the other party are but in the case that both of you don't fall out of the list of parties excluded (IBAC employees, gaming industry, law enforcement officer body cameras in public places etc) I would suggest you would have serious legal issues if you admitting to the use of a listening device without informing the other party.

I think you are just getting a little carried away trying to prove you are right about everything. Take a breath. We are living in a world surrounded by devices that not only record voices but images. According to you, we would all be breaking the law every time we use a device in a public place that records voices and images without asking everyone around us if it was ok to do so... Seriously. Turn it up mate.

 

[Zidane98]

Is it confirmed Lynn was using pellets/buckshot? We're thinking he was probably using solid lead slugs.

IF the bullet hit the mirror in the centre it would go straight through it and continue on its trajectory, losing a bit of force but not of huge significance.

If the bullet clipped or skimmed the frame, it might impact on trajectory, minimally on force.

Imo

On SM-G998B using BigFooty.com mobile app

Forensics testimony can't be too far away.

 

[Zidane98]

And there you go forensics testimony today

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/greg-lynn-trial-forensics-to-feature-as-missing-campers-russell-hill-and-carol-clays-deaths-probed/news-story/4eb234f041ad3f8f6e8a0eddd00063be

Molecular scientist is interesting.

 

[Zidane98]

I do find this troubling


On his account, Mr Hill swiped the firearm after claiming Mr Lynn was deer hunting too close to camp, and later fell on his own knife after coming after the accused man following Ms Clay’s accidental death.

“There’s no dispute between the prosecution and defence that as a matter of fact and as a matter of law, on the account given by Mr Lynn in that record of interview, he is not guilty of murder and he is not guilty of manslaughter,” Mr Dann said in his opening remarks.


I don't see why the prosecution would concede manslaughter is off the table from the account GL has given. At the end of the day from the account GL gave his actions and RH's actions together both caused the death of an innocent 3rd party. That's manslaughter for me.

 

[jason_recliner]

Molecular scientist is interesting.

Molecular biology is basically biology at the cellular level. He'll be testifying about DNA.

 

[jason_recliner]

I do find this troubling


On his account, Mr Hill swiped the firearm after claiming Mr Lynn was deer hunting too close to camp, and later fell on his own knife after coming after the accused man following Ms Clay’s accidental death.

“There’s no dispute between the prosecution and defence that as a matter of fact and as a matter of law, on the account given by Mr Lynn in that record of interview, he is not guilty of murder and he is not guilty of manslaughter,” Mr Dann said in his opening remarks.


I don't see why the prosecution would concede manslaughter is off the table from the account GL has given. At the end of the day from the account GL gave his actions and RH's actions together both caused the death of an innocent 3rd party. That's manslaughter for me.

He's being tried for murder. It's a misinterpretation/misquote.

 

[Sir_Loin]

He's being tried for murder. It's a misinterpretation/misquote.

The judge can also direct the jury on a manslaughter verdict as well if I’m not mistaken

 

[Sir_Loin]

It is not against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party. I recently had a situation where I had to do this and I told the police. They told me that as long as one member of the party being recorded had consented to the recording it was not illegal. This was between me and a second party... I was the consenting member. Recording is not illegal. What might be illegal is using it as evidence or publishing it.

Are you referring to a pretext call? These are admissible as evidence but need to be in a highly controlled environment, usually from a police station and only in certain alleged offences.

That’s not what happened in the article quoted - hence why the defence asked for it to be excluded.

 

[Sir_Loin]

I suppose we believe there was some altercation. Most murders aren’t just random and unplanned as this seems.

I think he can get off of his lawyers are good.

He’s got one of the best going around. I’ve always had in the back of my mind that if he got convicted of manslaughter he’d see it as a win.

He’s going to have to do a length of time on the other offences which no doubt would run concurrently and be discounted on time served given the nature of our laws. And there will be the obligatory appeal. Which is his right I guess.

What a nightmare for the victims families. It’s just never ends.

 

[LeChatNoir]

Are you referring to a pretext call? These are admissible as evidence but need to be in a highly controlled environment, usually from a police station and only in certain alleged offences.

That’s not what happened in the article quoted - hence why the defence asked for it to be excluded.

I was referring to what Zidane said specifically "Also against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party unless as you say there is a warrant."

 

[Sir_Loin]

I was referring to what Zidane said specifically "Also against the law to record a conversation without the permission of the other party unless as you say there is a warrant."

I think we’re crossing wires. The police can’t record a conversation and use it as evidence in the context of what we are discussing. I think you admitted that even though you have a recording of someone who didn’t provide permission it can’t be used as evidence.

That’s the point isn’t it?

 

[EagleEyes1]

Is it confirmed Lynn was using pellets/buckshot? We're thinking he was probably using solid lead slugs.

IF the bullet hit the mirror in the centre it would go straight through it and continue on its trajectory, losing a bit of force but not of huge significance.

If the bullet clipped or skimmed the frame, it might impact on trajectory, minimally on force.

Imo

On SM-G998B using BigFooty.com mobile app

I would say he used pellets even though not confirmed. They are more effective in close quarters. If he was going to use a solid slug he would have used a rifle to do the job from a distance.

Even if the round hit the centre of the side mirror, it would not continue a straight path. Side mirrors are always angled inwards, they are never perpendicular to a vehicle. Meaning anything that hits a side mirror will be derailed to another path. From a close distance there’s no doubt the pellets or some pellets would have hit Clay with lethal force however it would not be a concentrated hit as was the case. A ricochet group of pellets will not be concentrated, they would be randomised. We still haven’t seen any evidence of mirror fragments anywhere, the mirror is completely missing. I would say it was removed for a good reason.

Furthermore if the gun was fired from and near the bonnet there would be gunpowder residue found in this vicinity. We do not see any evidence of this.

I go back to the argument that Clay’s dna was found under the canopy, so clearly she was not standing when she was shot. She was also shot in the side of the head while allegedly facing the two during the scuffle.

 

[OzF]

Interesting you were given that advice by police. While there is nowhere that explicitly says you can't record a conversation with another party there are explicit regulations that say listening devices cannot be installed or used to monitor or record a conversation without permission from all parties apart from those excluded from doing so under law.

Further to this the contents of any such recording is against the law without the permission of both parties.

https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/4a03fae7-bea1-3082-adea-acaa473530a4_99-21aa040%20authorised.pdf

I don't know the circumstance of who you and the other party are but in the case that both of you don't fall out of the list of parties excluded (IBAC employees, gaming industry, law enforcement officer body cameras in public places etc) I would suggest you would have serious legal issues if you admitting to the use of a listening device without informing the other party.

It is in s6(1) of the link you posted

6 Regulation of installation, use and maintenance of listening devices
(1) Subject to subsection (2), a person must not knowingly install, use or maintain a listening device to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation to which the person is not a party, without the express or implied consent of each party to the conversation

 

[Sir_Loin]

I would say he used pellets even though not confirmed. They are more effective in close quarters. If he was going to use a solid slug he would have used a rifle to do the job from a distance.

Even if the round hit the centre of the side mirror, it would not continue a straight path. Side mirrors are always angled inwards, they are never perpendicular to a vehicle. Meaning anything that hits a side mirror will be derailed to another path. From a close distance there’s no doubt the pellets or some pellets would have hit Clay with lethal force however it would not be a concentrated hit as was the case. A ricochet group of pellets will not be concentrated, they would be randomised. We still haven’t seen any evidence of mirror fragments anywhere, the mirror is completely missing. I would say it was removed for a good reason.

Furthermore if the gun was fired from and near the bonnet there would be gunpowder residue found in this vicinity. We do not see any evidence of this.

I go back to the argument that Clay’s dna was found under the canopy, so clearly she was not standing when she was shot. She was also shot in the side of the head while allegedly facing the two during the scuffle.

Plenty of hunters use slugs. To be honest I don’t know any of my mates that hunt that would use it on deer, usually pigs. I initially thought it was unusual but it’s not when hunting deer apparently.

There’s a whole other thing when it comes to deer hunting in the high country that’s got some fringe elements to it. Can get very very weird.

 

[Terrafirma]

I suppose we believe there was some altercation. Most murders aren’t just random and unplanned as this seems.

I think he can get off of his lawyers are good.

So why was Carol Clay killed crouched down next to the car? With Shotgun pellets in her head?

 

[OzF]

I do find this troubling


On his account, Mr Hill swiped the firearm after claiming Mr Lynn was deer hunting too close to camp, and later fell on his own knife after coming after the accused man following Ms Clay’s accidental death.

“There’s no dispute between the prosecution and defence that as a matter of fact and as a matter of law, on the account given by Mr Lynn in that record of interview, he is not guilty of murder and he is not guilty of manslaughter,” Mr Dann said in his opening remarks.


I don't see why the prosecution would concede manslaughter is off the table from the account GL has given. At the end of the day from the account GL gave his actions and RH's actions together both caused the death of an innocent 3rd party. That's manslaughter for me.

DBM

 

[Terrafirma]

I think we’re crossing wires. The police can’t record a conversation and use it as evidence in the context of what we are discussing. I think you admitted that even though you have a recording of someone who didn’t provide permission it can’t be used as evidence.

That’s the point isn’t it?

A law enforcement officer may apply to an authorised judge or magistrate for the issue of a surveillance device warrant which may record private conversations or activities. A warrant can only be obtained if the officer has reason to suspect or believe that:

• An offence is being, is about to be, has been, or is likely to be committed; and
• The use of a surveillance device is necessary in the investigation and collection of evidence of that crime.

The issue of warrants is overseen by the Public Interest Monitor. If granted, the warrant with authorise the use of a specific type of device on specified premises. It may allow entry by force, if necessary, to install and to later retrieve the device.

 

[OzF]

I would expect that the prosecution will soon go down the character assassination path of GL. This seems a no brainer as it is unlikely GL will testify to refute and the prosecution will want to build a belief beyond reasonable doubt amongst the jury pool that GL is capable of RH's murder. It doesn't take a big leap to then sell the idea that GL subsequently silents CC as a witness if the first part is convincing.

DBM