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

Did Greg Lynn tell police where he buried the bodies?

  • Total voters
    80
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #44
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
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.'
 
Last edited:
It had to happen, premieres tomorrow on Binge.

Detective Andie Whitford gets transferred to the High Country, where she is tasked with investigating the mysterious disappearances of five locals lost in the Victorian wilderness.

  • Drama
  • Australian
  • Crime

 

Log in to remove this ad.

Hammeroid said:
Do we have set date for trial for old grego?

I very much anticipate this one.
Click to expand...
The trial has already slarted; the argument about admisability of evidence is voir dire heard in the absence of the jury and it is not reported because knowledge of this evidence, if not accepted by the Court, may influence the jury's future deliberations

Some witnesses may have been been before the Court and the evidence in their depositions tested by the prosection and the defence
 
There have been matters where there are suppression orders that even prohibit the reporting of the existence of the matter itself and any suppression orders. There were extremely broad suppression orders in the Pell and Adrian Bayley matters.

However, I suspect this is just because there are current arguments regarding the admissibility of some evidence. They may not be reporting about it precisely due to the risk of revealing evidence that is then deemed admissible, but there may be a suppression order in place until they have resolved it because it is otherwise difficult to prevent the media reporting.

This case has a lot of evidence that could be considered highly prejudicial. The fact that the DPP is appealing suggests to me that at least some was ruled prejudicial, and some that they think is important to their case. While the DPP can obviously appeal any ruling if they have grounds, they often don't if they weren't dependent on the evidence or if they believed getting it in was a long shot anyway (which would usually mean they weren't dependent on it in the first place).

I'd be surprised if we see much propensity evidence in this case. The propensity evidence that might be introduced here seems far more tenuously linked to me than what we saw admitted in the Claremont case; in fact it seems more like the evidence that was ruled inadmissible in the Claremont case, such as the pr0n and stories on the computer and the - errr - odd things found in the garage.
 
ms finch said:
There have been matters where there are suppression orders that even prohibit the reporting of the existence of the matter itself and any suppression orders. There were extremely broad suppression orders in the Pell and Adrian Bayley matters.

However, I suspect this is just because there are current arguments regarding the admissibility of some evidence. They may not be reporting about it precisely due to the risk of revealing evidence that is then deemed admissible, but there may be a suppression order in place until they have resolved it because it is otherwise difficult to prevent the media reporting.

This case has a lot of evidence that could be considered highly prejudicial. The fact that the DPP is appealing suggests to me that at least some was ruled prejudicial, and some that they think is important to their case. While the DPP can obviously appeal any ruling if they have grounds, they often don't if they weren't dependent on the evidence or if they believed getting it in was a long shot anyway (which would usually mean they weren't dependent on it in the first place).

I'd be surprised if we see much propensity evidence in this case. The propensity evidence that might be introduced here seems far more tenuously linked to me than what we saw admitted in the Claremont case; in fact it seems more like the evidence that was ruled inadmissible in the Claremont case, such as the pr0n and stories on the computer and the - errr - odd things found in the garage.
Click to expand...

Surely we can't be far away from the evidentiary hearings being concluded and the trial starting? To my knowledge these hearings started in mid Feb. The DPP appeal was heard over a week ago.
 
Zidane98 said:
Surely we can't be far away from the evidentiary hearings being concluded and the trial starting? To my knowledge these hearings started in mid Feb. The DPP appeal was heard over a week ago.
Click to expand...
That depends on the complexity of the appeal, the other matters the appellate justices are hearing, and the appellate justices themselves.

A week is not a long time at all in the legal process. Could easily take 2-3 months.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Zidane98 said:
If a deal can't be agreed between DPP and GL's defense a trial must surely be starting any day now. I do find the absolute media blackout on a case that was so high profile just a little bizarre.
Click to expand...
Read up on Voir Dire in the Courts.

Any discussion or arguement on the admissibilaty of evidence in a Court which is conducted in the absence of a Jury is not to reported on.

It may be discussed when the trial is completed but until then the reporting of this discussion is off limits to prevent the jury decision being affected.

It would appear that the DPP wanted to lead certain evidence to the trial, the defence objected and the Judge leant the defence's way. so the DPP upped the discussion to the Court of Criminal Appeals to appeal the Judges decision.

We punters or the Jury won't know of this until after the case is completed,

The jury makes its decision purely on the evidence presented and tested in the Court

Something like a recent trial which was aborted because a juror did his/her own research as the evidence possibly contained in the private research could not be tested in open Court
 
GrayRanga said:
Read up on Voir Dire in the Courts.

Any discussion or arguement on the admissibilaty of evidence in a Court which is conducted in the absence of a Jury is not to reported on.

It may be discussed when the trial is completed but until then the reporting of this discussion is off limits to prevent the jury decision being affected.

It would appear that the DPP wanted to lead certain evidence to the trial, the defence objected and the Judge leant the defence's way. so the DPP upped the discussion to the Court of Criminal Appeals to appeal the Judges decision.

We punters or the Jury won't know of this until after the case is completed,

The jury makes its decision purely on the evidence presented and tested in the Court

Something like a recent trial which was aborted because a juror did his/her own research as the evidence possibly contained in the private research could not be tested in open Court
Click to expand...
Appreciate the update. Thank you.
 
This is all rather strange. Case super high profile in media, supposedly starting in Feb. Now it's almost May. Multiple hearings held on what nobody knows and going from one of the highest profile cases around to absolutely zero media exposure.
 
Zidane98 said:
This is all rather strange. Case super high profile in media, supposedly starting in Feb. Now it's almost May. Multiple hearings held on what nobody knows and going from one of the highest profile cases around to absolutely zero media exposure.
Click to expand...

Still at pretrial directions hearings I'd think. At the end of the trial we'll probably see press headlines something like this

Here's What The Jury Wasn't Allowed to Know
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kurve
Solved Australia's Heinous Woodchipper Murder - Sharon Graham found guilty
Replies
14
Views
691
Kurve
Kurve
Truckosaurus
Solved Zoologist Adam Britton pleads guilty to dozens of charges incl bestiality & torture rape of pet dogs - NT
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
6K
Underarrest_
U
Kurve
Current Murder of Mother & Infant - Perth
Replies
1
Views
704
jason_recliner
J
Kurve
Unsolved Disappearance Murder of 14yo Marilyn Wallman of McKay - INQUEST
Replies
20
Views
795
Bunk Moreland
Bunk Moreland
Kurve
Current Murder/suicide Rebecca Young - Ballarat
Replies
4
Views
588
Bostonian
Bostonian
Kurve
Current Mother & Son Murdered at Martial Arts Centre & Father Murdered at Another Location
Replies
15
Views
1K
Krusty Crab
K
N
Operation Jarrah - the murders of four missing men in South Australia
Replies
6
Views
898
nominal_port_supporter
N
Back
Top