Australia - Russell Hill & Carol Clay Murdered While Camping - Wonnangatta Valley, 2020 #7

[SouthAussie]

A suppression order is not a ruling on evidence’s admissibility. It is suppression on it being publicised now to ensure a fair trial but I guess it’s admissibility will come into question later, right? I’m not totally sure on this process, if anyone could clarify

I think they have slapped a suppression order on the evidence for now.
If the case gets to Supreme Court, his lawyers may try to have the first interview deemed as inadmissible.

When I read the DM article, his lawyer did a lot of complaining in court about the interview tactics.


The court heard Lynn was held within the jail cells of Sale police station without legal representation for the duration of the interview.
Senior Constable Passingham said Lynn was not provided access to a lawyer until the next day when he spoke to a female solicitor for an hour and a quarter.
While the contents of the interview must remain a secret, it can be revealed Mr Dann was critical in the way police went about interviewing his client.
Mr Dann repeatedly questioned Senior Constable Passingham's professionalism and grilled him on his knowledge about what a police officer can and can't do while conducting a record of interview.

 

[emirates1957]

MOO: I feel SK is a real possibility. This is the theory I'm examining:

Drone irritates GL to get out and load doubled barreled shotgun and shoots it down in anger.

Argument follows with RH&CC and GL realises his burst of anger will be the focus of police scrutiny for unlawful discharge of a firearm/ destruction of property.

If this was the case, RH&CC were starting make preparations to pack up the inside of their tent and leave when GL acted.

Possible motive: concealment of history as a previously unknown SK?

Would you kill two strangers because you fear your firearms licence might be at risk or because of a camping spot or a drone?

Just a theoretical scenario and motive. MOO.

Nah….doesn’t add up …. a professional senior pilot just happens to loose his cool in his 56th year over what could be a drone. Only one extra persons demise and there you have a SK. Pilots when confronted with a stressor are taught “to sit on their hands” not literally, but to stop and think and then react weighing up all possibilities. I reckon there are more people out there JMO.

 

[emirates1957]

Someone who did something like even approaching someone with a loaded gun, might be in a bit of trouble if they were reported, if their job might be affected.

How lenient is the airline industry to one of it's pilots being arrested over a weapon's charge.
Maybe he approached Russell and Carol with the gun after a dispute over the drone or the camping spot or both.

Maybe Russell or Carol said they were going to report him, so he shot both of them.

When applying for his ASIC security pass every 2 years - if there was a charge against him regarding the above Auscheck may not approve this. Last thing you need is a ”loose canon” flying people around in a metal box at 37K feet. After all these sort of folk with perhaps NPD - believe they are untouchable and have probably got way with stuff for years!!!

 

[JBowie]

Pilots when confronted with a stressor are taught “to sit on their hands” not literally, but to stop and think and then react weighing up all possibilities.

I would say that's true of good pilots but was he considered a good pilot? IIRC, it's been said that other pilots were not keen to fly with him.

 

[Detective Willy]

The sorry thing about these pre-trial shenanigans is that it highlights the inadequacy of the modern legal system.

At the end of the day the goal should be that guilty people are found guilty and innocent people are found innocent.

Why do we still have a legal system where guilty people can be found innocent or have very serious charges downgraded due to "technicalities" or going to great lengths to cover up their crimes? Why so many times is crucial evidence ruled as inadmissible?

IMO it should be compulsory for defendants facing murder charges to take the stand and face questioning by the prosecution. They should not be able to hide behind their lawyer and archaic laws.

Guilt or Innocence seems to be secondary these days.

It becomes a circus of "the defence v the prosecution" with all of the fine intricacies and legal arguments in between.

 

[JBowie]

IMO it should be compulsory for defendants facing murder charges to take the stand and face questioning by the prosecution. They should not be able to hide behind their lawyer and archaic laws.

That's akin to being hauled before the NSW Crime Commission. Not sure if VIC has a similar body.

 

[srper2]

I am not sure if this has been mentioned before but in that infamous photo is it just me or is the LH side mirror completely missing from Russell’s landcruiser and only the frame remaining? Figure that is cause for the theory that the altercation happened right there (including the splatter). I just hadn’t noticed its absence before.

This was discussed way back, as RH's vehicle was well cared for and the missing mirror raised red flags.

 

[JudgeJudi]

The Missing Person's Squad detective said police had made thousands of recordings of Lynn in his car in the 11 months before his arrest in Victoria's high country.

'In what I had listened to of the accused, he had expressed it as a chapter in life,' Senior Constable Passingham said.

Passingham also claimed GL had mentioned while driving alone in his vehicle that his 'book had been written'.

'These are in the recordings that are taken while he is driving the Nissan Patrol,' he said.

Secret tapes capture pilot Greg Lynn mumbling about campers's death

 

[emirates1957]

I would say that's true of good pilots but was he considered a good pilot? IIRC, it's been said that other pilots were not keen to fly with him.

His first wife flew for Kendell Airlines prior to 2000 and the crew/staff stated she was brilliant. The same cannot be said about GL - a Senior Check Captain has the ability to sign a Pilot off as compliant or non compliant (huge responsibility……he must have had the flying skills albeit not the personality)…..word at a reunion I went to recently was crew would go sick so they didn’t have to fly or be checked by him. A Check Captain holds a persons career in their hands……hmm by the sound of it he also holds a few weapons as well.

 

[JudgeJudi]

You have the right to make two phone calls:

• one to a lawyer
• one to a friend or relative.

The police must give you a private space to use the phone, where the police cannot hear you.

The police officer might not let you call anyone if:

• …
• the police officer reasonably believes the phone call may:
  • help another person involved in the offence get away
  • lose, change or destroy evidence
  • put other people in danger.

https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/being-arrested

He probably thought he was the smartest person in the room and didn't need advice from anyone. In this day and age, how many people don't know they have the right to speak to a lawyer.

 

[AussieIan]

With the new evidence we've heard about the unusual order and method of the victims dying, is anyone on the fence about GLs theory?

'If it was an accident why not call the police'

Getting into a fight with a bloke resulting in accidental death is one thing But accidentally killing an old lady then her partner... could it be true and he just panicked because it escalated so far beyond and he tried to cover it up. Why were they fighting over the gun in the first place though.


The PO saying he had expressed it as 'a chapter in his life' is interesting to me that makes me think of when you've made a big mistake or somethings gone wrong but you got through it, its in the past and are trying to move on. That kind of talk makes me think it was an accident not the act of a SK.


Just MOO a bit of devils advocate.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Nothing like trying to read posts, reply and watch the AO at the same time.

 

[JudgeJudi]

That's akin to being hauled before the NSW Crime Commission. Not sure if VIC has a similar body.

Yes, they do. The Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) is Victoria's anti-corruption agency with jurisdiction over the public sector.

IBAC is Victoria's agency responsible for preventing and exposing public sector corruption and police misconduct. Our jurisdiction covers state and local government, police, parliament and the judiciary.

As Victoria's anti-corruption agency, IBAC:

• receives complaints and notifications of public sector corruption and police misconduct
• investigates and exposes serious corruption and police misconduct
• informs the public sector, police and the community about risks and impacts of corruption and police misconduct, and ways it can be prevented.

About us | IBAC

 

[JBowie]

He probably thought he was the smartest person in the room and didn't need advice from anyone. In this day and age, how many people don't know they have the right to speak to a lawyer.

Yep, but as I've said here before, some people think that refusing to talk before they consult a lawyer makes them seem automatically guilty.

Others -- who were subsequently charged and tried -- think they can play innocent while at the same time trying to determine what facts the police have (smart cops counter this by not revealing all of their cards from the outset).

 

[JBowie]

Yes, they do. The Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) is Victoria's anti-corruption agency with jurisdiction over the public sector.

But IBAC's scope is limited to people working in the public sector. The NSW ICC does not have that limit.

IBAC seems closer to NSW ICAC than the ICC.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Yep, but as I've said here before, some people think that refusing to talk before they consult a lawyer makes them seem automatically guilty.

But he talked and talked and talked.

 

[JBowie]

But he talked and talked and talked.

More fool him.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

You have the right to make two phone calls:

• one to a lawyer
• one to a friend or relative.

I don't know if he requested a lawyer, but he did ask to speak to his wife. His request was allegedly refused.

"Upon his arrest, Lynn had asked to make a phone call to his flight attendant wife Melanie Lynn, who tuned into Monday's hearing via videolink.

The request was allegedly refused, with police taking Lynn back to Sale police station for questioning while secretly recording him.

Senior Constable Passingham said Lynn was not provided access to a lawyer until the next day when he spoke to a female solicitor for an hour and a quarter"

Secret tapes capture pilot Greg Lynn mumbling about campers's death

Jetstar pilot Greg Lynn described the alleged murders of secret lover campers as another 'chapter in life' before his dramatic arrest in Victoria's high country.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[JudgeJudi]

Yep, but as I've said here before, some people think that refusing to talk before they consult a lawyer makes them seem automatically guilty.

He's an intelligent man. He didn't refuse to talk.

He was charged on 25 November.
The remains were found on 30 November.

The 3000-question interview went for an epic nine hours and 18 minutes - the longest Senior Constable Passingham had ever conducted.

Secret tapes capture pilot Greg Lynn mumbling about campers's death

ETA: Spelling error

 

[JBowie]

He's didn't refuse to talk.

Yes, I get that. I was saying why some people don't choose to engage a lawyer.