Current Trial Wonnangatta - Russell Hill & Carol Clay vanish *Pilot Greg Lynn charged with murder

[Kurve]

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.'

 

[sprockets]

Someone posted an aerial pic of car that was taken in sept 2017 and although it looked blue or dark coloured, I think it still looked white at the edges, given that the bonnet seems to always have been black

The bonnet was white in 2016.

Has there been any talk of Lynn shooting Deer?

There has been in here, not that I necessarily believe Lynn was there for that but it's a possibility. We're all really just mulling over possibilities, probabilities and other nonsense with a few known facts thrown in every now and then when they become available.

 

[Terrafirma]

Lynn’s lawyer, Chris McLennan, told the court he was aware the investigation was “fairly substantial,” understanding it may take longer than usual to receive the detective’s brief of evidence.

McLennan made no application for bail on behalf of Lynn.

The above was prior to the remains being found.! McLennan has plenty of reading to do.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Lynn’s lawyer, Chris McLennan, told the court he was aware the investigation was “fairly substantial,” understanding it may take longer than usual to receive the detective’s brief of evidence.

McLennan made no application for bail on behalf of Lynn.

The above was prior to the remains being found.! McLennan has plenty of reading to do.

He could start with this thread

 

[Terrafirma]

He could start with this thread

There are enough alibi's here..! There'd have to be over 30 possible scenarios in case McLennan can't think of any.?

 

[highcountry]

As mentioned in a previous post I know a dozen plus people who knew Lynn and his first wife Lisa. In the end she was petrified of him and told people he had threatened to kill her. More recently he is known for having a volatile temper at work and would go ballistic at pilots he was checking in they made mistakes. He was also considered an oddball because at times he would just disappear. But most notable, on occasion he had come to work with deep scratches on his arms. Not just once. There has been a lot of talk on this thread about what a normal person's motive might be to kill two people? What sort of argument escalates to that point? Be it over a drone, the best camp site or what ever. It all seems out of proportion ... because it is. Normal people don't respond that way. But it is also not normal to have had two wives die in suspicious circumstances. Normal people don't say stay out of my business ... or I will kill you. Normal people don't kill pets. Normal people don't get asked to leave the RAAF or get sacked from an airline after one year for personalty issues. What I'm trying to suggest is that the people who knew him have painted a picture of someone who they would not expect to act or react in a normal way. So trying to assign normal thought processes or what you and I might do in certain scenarios to reach a rational motive may not lead to correct conclusions in this case. As I've said before it must be acknowledged that Lynn was investigated and cleared by coronal inquest in the death of his first wife. That will obviously need to be re examined and may be the reason his initial questioning took so long. But hypothetically, if we were to work on the assumption that the perp, even if not Lynn, may have been involved in one or two other deaths, that changes absolutely everything. Serial killers don't need a motive to kill. They don't need something like a drone or an argument to trigger them. And they don't usually shy away from act of killing in cold blood, for example, by taking an easy way out by running them over with a car. That's where I now sit having spoken to those who knew him personally.That is what these people I've spoken to all think, without exception. Even the media are now starting to openly consider the serial killer angle. What ever happened up in the high country was horrendous. Some of Lynn's past behavior is known to have been horrendous. And therefore it's not beyond the scope of rational thought to wonder if he is guilty of murders he is charged with .... if he has killed before.

 

[Anja_Nees]

He could start with this thread

“Haha hey Greg, get this. Last week the clowns on Bigfooty were guessing you sold your trailer on Gumtree. Bloody armchair detectives.

…You did f***ing what?!?”

 

[Kwality]

Yes, early on in the case it was reported a few times that she had a fair idea about the affair for the last 20 years.

Gossip, irrelevant to anything.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Don’t think it’ll end up being anything much more interesting that he’s a nutter, he snapped at something minor and killed them both. End of story. Possibly alcohol or drugs involved.

Cause of death is the question I guess - shooting / knife / bashing / strangulation? Hopefully it was as quick and painless as possible.

 

[DropBearess]

This thread has to be the best, fairest and most balanced for a long time! Great reading! A credit to all for making almost every post respectful and worthy of consideration.

I've probably missed the original source, but where did the info come from that the couple definitely had sleeping bags? Are we sure? Does anyone have a link? This seems to be a key point of discussion and the basis of many theories. Toilets are another good point and l think usage, or lack thereof, is important.

I don't have a specific theory but l have a few experiences to offer as an older, seasoned camper. Also as part of a long-distance (but fortunately not illicit) relationship where camping was a halfway point between our locations at the time when we were both studying furiously as older students.

We were/are very fit and healthy and never disadvantaged by age in anything at all. Age should not come into this anyway.

We never used sleeping bags, regardless of weather. Why would you if you don't see each other often? How do we know they even had them? We always used quilts. If l or my partner went missing, no-one in our families would have a clue if we took sleeping bags or anything else, so how did the police know?

Toilet-wise, l will always, always use a toilet/portapotty when available even for a wee.
Most women certainly would, especially older women! My partner might use a bush for a wee.

So the usual order of things when camping for couples who haven't caught up in a while, older or not, might be this:-

* Use the last public loo before destination.
* Have a celebratory drink on arrival.
* Unpack and set up well before dark.
* Quick discussion about dinner, cooking facilities assembled and food underway.
* Male has a quick walkabout with boy's toys (fishing, droning, wood etc.)
* Female makes tent nice and romantic.
* Dinner is served with nice wine, which is expected and appreciated.
* Lots of wonderful conversations with drinks if you haven't caught up for a while. These conversations could go well into the night as neither has to go anywhere.
* Any woman would need a wee at least once after dinner and wouldn't use a bush. She would want a proper toilet tent to make herself nice for romance.
* Then you would both take your shoes off before settling. Seasoned bush campers will never set foot outside their tent without shoes.
* Then you retire and do whatever you want. Almost certainly not in separate sleeping bags!

Sorry if this sounds sexist, but wouldn't this be a common process for camping couples when given the opportunity? Correct me if l'm wrong.

So at what point in this couples' night did everything go pear-shaped?

 

[Dusty 17]

This thread has to be the best, fairest and most balanced for a long time! Great reading! A credit to all for making almost every post respectful and worthy of consideration.

I've probably missed the original source, but where did the info come from that the couple definitely had sleeping bags? Are we sure? Does anyone have a link? This seems to be a key point of discussion and the basis of many theories. Toilets are another good point and l think usage, or lack thereof, is important.

I don't have a specific theory but l have a few experiences to offer as an older, seasoned camper. Also as part of a long-distance (but fortunately not illicit) relationship where camping was a halfway point between our locations at the time when we were both studying furiously as older students.

We were/are very fit and healthy and never disadvantaged by age in anything at all. Age should not come into this anyway.

We never used sleeping bags, regardless of weather. Why would you if you don't see each other often? How do we know they even had them? We always used quilts. If l or my partner went missing, no-one in our families would have a clue if we took sleeping bags or anything else, so how did the police know?

Toilet-wise, l will always, always use a toilet/portapotty when available even for a wee.
Most women certainly would, especially older women! My partner might use a bush for a wee.

So the usual order of things when camping for couples who haven't caught up in a while, older or not, might be this:-

* Use the last public loo before destination.
* Have a celebratory drink on arrival.
* Unpack and set up well before dark.
* Quick discussion about dinner, cooking facilities assembled and food underway.
* Male has a quick walkabout with boy's toys (fishing, droning, wood etc.)
* Female makes tent nice and romantic.
* Dinner is served with nice wine, which is expected and appreciated.
* Lots of wonderful conversations with drinks if you haven't caught up for a while. These conversations could go well into the night as neither has to go anywhere.
* Any woman would need a wee at least once after dinner and wouldn't use a bush. She would want a proper toilet tent to make herself nice for romance.
* Then you would both take your shoes off before settling. Seasoned bush campers will never set foot outside their tent without shoes.
* Then you retire and do whatever you want. Almost certainly not in separate sleeping bags!

Sorry if this sounds sexist, but wouldn't this be a common process for camping couples when given the opportunity? Correct me if l'm wrong.

So at what point in this couples' night did everything go pear-shaped?

Thanks for your words, which echo the way I feel about these threads and the calm, measured and respectful contributions made here. I had occasion to look at one of the threads on popular social media, and the sentiments expressed there were quite shallow in comparison. Not sure about the camp routines followed by Russel and Carol, but I am guessing that in regards to sleeping bags, it might have been something that was easier to pack than a doona, although I think you can get double sleeping bags. I also got the impression that they had gone camping together quite a few times previously. Whatever happened on that awful night should not have happened, so all we can really hope was that neither suffered.


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

 

[PetterdHoisted]

This thread has to be the best, fairest and most balanced for a long time! Great reading! A credit to all for making almost every post respectful and worthy of consideration.

I've probably missed the original source, but where did the info come from that the couple definitely had sleeping bags? Are we sure? Does anyone have a link? This seems to be a key point of discussion and the basis of many theories. Toilets are another good point and l think usage, or lack thereof, is important.

I don't have a specific theory but l have a few experiences to offer as an older, seasoned camper. Also as part of a long-distance (but fortunately not illicit) relationship where camping was a halfway point between our locations at the time when we were both studying furiously as older students.

We were/are very fit and healthy and never disadvantaged by age in anything at all. Age should not come into this anyway.

We never used sleeping bags, regardless of weather. Why would you if you don't see each other often? How do we know they even had them? We always used quilts. If l or my partner went missing, no-one in our families would have a clue if we took sleeping bags or anything else, so how did the police know?

Toilet-wise, l will always, always use a toilet/portapotty when available even for a wee.
Most women certainly would, especially older women! My partner might use a bush for a wee.

So the usual order of things when camping for couples who haven't caught up in a while, older or not, might be this:-

* Use the last public loo before destination.
* Have a celebratory drink on arrival.
* Unpack and set up well before dark.
* Quick discussion about dinner, cooking facilities assembled and food underway.
* Male has a quick walkabout with boy's toys (fishing, droning, wood etc.)
* Female makes tent nice and romantic.
* Dinner is served with nice wine, which is expected and appreciated.
* Lots of wonderful conversations with drinks if you haven't caught up for a while. These conversations could go well into the night as neither has to go anywhere.
* Any woman would need a wee at least once after dinner and wouldn't use a bush. She would want a proper toilet tent to make herself nice for romance.
* Then you would both take your shoes off before settling. Seasoned bush campers will never set foot outside their tent without shoes.
* Then you retire and do whatever you want. Almost certainly not in separate sleeping bags!

Sorry if this sounds sexist, but wouldn't this be a common process for camping couples when given the opportunity? Correct me if l'm wrong.

So at what point in this couples' night did everything go pear-shaped?

Zip the bags together to form a double bag?

 

[Longmembrey]

Except we know he tried to leave via the Myrtleford gate...indicating he wasn't planning on heading to Dargo or Grants HA

Would HEMA sat nav have shown the road closure?

 

[Longmembrey]

yeah that sounds more plausible. I’m down a rabbit hole now with all the weird sh*t that goes on up there with the deer hunting. It’s a disgrace.

Where are you reading about what goes on?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Zip the bags together to form a double bag?

Exactly - that's what I do.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

yeah that sounds more plausible. I’m down a rabbit hole now with all the weird sh*t that goes on up there with the deer hunting. It’s a disgrace.

Wont be long before it is Brumby hunting if the legislation on control doesnt change. Especially further north east up in NSW. Campers and hunters will begin taking it upon themselves to protect their favourite spots.

The Brumby Wars is an interesting read on the problem with ferel horses up there.

 

[Badd0g]

This thread has to be the best, fairest and most balanced for a long time! Great reading! A credit to all for making almost every post respectful and worthy of consideration....

'''Toilet-wise, l will always, always use a toilet/portapotty when available even for a wee.
Most women certainly would, especially older women! My partner might use a bush for a wee.

I have to agree..it's been a great discussion!

Re the toilet....it's just occurred to me that maybe the porta-loo was specifically for overnight. There's every chance that CC could have used the drop dunny nearby (which I wasn't previously aware existed) prior to retiring for the night. The lack of evidence of shoes in the rubble however does point to the fact that they hadn't actually gone to bed.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Where are you reading about what goes on?

a google search will bring up a number of stories about illegal hunting, animal cruelty, accidental deaths and firing weapons on private land at night.

Just to be clear, I’m not against hunting provided it’s done professionally and ethically.

 

[footscray1973]

This thread has to be the best, fairest and most balanced for a long time! Great reading! A credit to all for making almost every post respectful and worthy of consideration.

I've probably missed the original source, but where did the info come from that the couple definitely had sleeping bags? Are we sure? Does anyone have a link? This seems to be a key point of discussion and the basis of many theories. Toilets are another good point and l think usage, or lack thereof, is important.

I don't have a specific theory but l have a few experiences to offer as an older, seasoned camper. Also as part of a long-distance (but fortunately not illicit) relationship where camping was a halfway point between our locations at the time when we were both studying furiously as older students.

We were/are very fit and healthy and never disadvantaged by age in anything at all. Age should not come into this anyway.

We never used sleeping bags, regardless of weather. Why would you if you don't see each other often? How do we know they even had them? We always used quilts. If l or my partner went missing, no-one in our families would have a clue if we took sleeping bags or anything else, so how did the police know?

Toilet-wise, l will always, always use a toilet/portapotty when available even for a wee.
Most women certainly would, especially older women! My partner might use a bush for a wee.

So the usual order of things when camping for couples who haven't caught up in a while, older or not, might be this:-

* Use the last public loo before destination.
* Have a celebratory drink on arrival.
* Unpack and set up well before dark.
* Quick discussion about dinner, cooking facilities assembled and food underway.
* Male has a quick walkabout with boy's toys (fishing, droning, wood etc.)
* Female makes tent nice and romantic.
* Dinner is served with nice wine, which is expected and appreciated.
* Lots of wonderful conversations with drinks if you haven't caught up for a while. These conversations could go well into the night as neither has to go anywhere.
* Any woman would need a wee at least once after dinner and wouldn't use a bush. She would want a proper toilet tent to make herself nice for romance.
* Then you would both take your shoes off before settling. Seasoned bush campers will never set foot outside their tent without shoes.
* Then you retire and do whatever you want. Almost certainly not in separate sleeping bags!

Sorry if this sounds sexist, but wouldn't this be a common process for camping couples when given the opportunity? Correct me if l'm wrong.

So at what point in this couples' night did everything go pear-shaped?

Fantastic post. I agree on your sentiments - probably the only thing cluttering up the thread are ridiculous theories - proposed by idiots like me!

I'm late 50s, and still have kids (well teenagers/young adults) along on our adventures, and predominantly caravan these days, usually with larger circle of family/friends.

But as with you, not wanting to be sexist, my better and half and I sort of follow your steps, with more blurred lines these days re setting up van, dinner, etc. And yes, no shoes in our van either, just like a tent! And all the women in our group/s would use a portaloo in favour of a bush, but if facilities are available, even long drop, us blokes tend to use them.

Using your steps/timeline, I suspect either RH and GL had a confrontation on what you label the 'male walkabout with toys', triggered either by GL being in RH's preferred site, and/or a subsequent drone flyover by RH of GL's site. Agreeing with your post-dinner wee for CC and shoes off before entering the tent, seems to point to some/most of the activities between the drone flight and retiring not occurring, hence the unused portaloo and absence of shoes. Your point about sleeping bags is a good one, not sure where this originated.
We take sleeping bags in the van on long trips - usually to use in case of cold night, but otherwise they all unzip right out as effectively a doona. But most of our travelling is in warm weather, esp northern Australia, so usually a sheet suffices, or most times no covering at all in the tropics. Even camping in colder weather, just as likely to have sleeping bag fully unzipped and use doona-style as just as warm, and better for 'holding hands'!

 

[footscray1973]

I have to agree..it's been a great discussion!

Re the toilet....it's just occurred to me that maybe the porta-loo was specifically for overnight. There's every chance that CC could have used the drop dunny nearby (which I wasn't previously aware existed) prior to retiring for the night. The lack of evidence of shoes in the rubble however does point to the fact that they hadn't actually gone to bed.

Good point about the drop dunny, I didn't realise there was one. That might change that piece of evidence - although fussy adults and children (in my experience!) will forego long drops if their condition is not appealing (have seen some shockers at roadside stops, esp in northern Australia). But given the dedicated shower tent in front of the vehicle (I assume for the portaloo) would indicate that was the preferred ablution site?
The shoes is still a big one though, I think. No evidence in the burnt out tent, not in RH's vehicle, and not sure a murderer would put shoes on victims after killing them. Points to them still wearing their shoes, not retired for the night, and likely a daylight, or early evening, assault.

Edit: unless he did kill them in the tent and thought to take their shoes to create confusion - or am I giving GL too much credit?

 

[Badd0g]

The Hun now reporting jewellery found at site. Can't see pay walled content.

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

 

[Satan]

The Hun now reporting jewellery found at site. Can't see pay walled content.

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

A ring found at the crime scene where the suspected remains of the missing campers were found may hold the key to give two grieving families closure.
DNA testing of bone fragments discovered in Victoria’s high country believed to be linked to slain campers Russell Hill and Carol Clay will continue over coming days as experts search for conclusive evidence they belong to the pair.

Other key lines of inquiry for police working the case will be results from forensic testing of a Nissan Patrol vehicle that was seized last week.

They will also investigate any leads after a public appeal to find a trailer sold on Gumtree between March and July last year, believed to be linked to the deaths of the campers.


Police are also yet to find Mr Hill’s drone – a new purchase at the time he and longtime family friend Mrs Clay went missing.

It comes as the mammoth three day search effort at the Union Spur Track in the Grant Historic area 24km north of Dargo wrapped up on Wednesday evening.

During the meticulous search detectives from the missing persons squad focused on a root ball hole – a pit caused by a tree falling over.

Personal belongings found at the scene including jewellery and a set of dentures may offer the families of Mrs Clay and Mr Hill closure after 20 months of uncertainty.

 

[BFew]

Ring Ring
Who's there?
Hopefully enough evidence to ID Russell Hill and Carol Clay.

New images of suspected burial ground

Eerie images reveal the precise location of where detectives unearthed human remains, believed to be that of missing Wonnangatta campers Russell Hill and Carol Clay.

www.news.com.au

'Police have discovered a ring at the same location where detectives unearthed human remains, believed to be that of missing Wonnangatta campers Russell Hill and Carol Clay.
The piece of jewellery may hold the key to give the two grieving families closure.'

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Good point about the drop dunny, I didn't realise there was one. That might change that piece of evidence - although fussy adults and children (in my experience!) will forego long drops if their condition is not appealing (have seen some shockers at roadside stops, esp in northern Australia). But given the dedicated shower tent in front of the vehicle (I assume for the portaloo) would indicate that was the preferred ablution site?
The shoes is still a big one though, I think. No evidence in the burnt out tent, not in RH's vehicle, and not sure a murderer would put shoes on victims after killing them. Points to them still wearing their shoes, not retired for the night, and likely a daylight, or early evening, assault.

Edit: unless he did kill them in the tent and thought to take their shoes to create confusion - or am I giving GL too much credit?

Maybe he took them and has been wearing them. Nice new pair of RMs shouldn’t go to waste.

 

[Badd0g]

Ring Ring
Who's there?
Hopefully enough evidence to ID Russell Hill and Carol Clay.

New images of suspected burial ground

Eerie images reveal the precise location of where detectives unearthed human remains, believed to be that of missing Wonnangatta campers Russell Hill and Carol Clay.

www.news.com.au

'Police have discovered a ring at the same location where detectives unearthed human remains, believed to be that of missing Wonnangatta campers Russell Hill and Carol Clay.
The piece of jewellery may hold the key to give the two grieving families closure.'

A ring AND dentures.... Seems like a slam dunk if positively linked. I do hope so for the families. If not the why, at least the where.

 

[BFew]

A ring AND dentures

If only the dentures could talk.