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

New Posts

SouthAussie said:
The jury have the option of finding him guilty of manslaughter. Which, I think, will likely happen if they feel any reasonable doubt about a double murder.

It really seems like such a stretch for two people to be killed by "accident" in the space of probably a minute or two.
One from a ricochet and the other by falling on his own knife.

What are the chances of Russell falling on his own knife in such a manner that it quickly killed him? Didn't maim him, but killed him. Right after (GL's story) Carol was killed by a stray 12 gauge slug.
Click to expand...
Wait, he was shooting slugs? Is that confirmed?
 
My feeling always with these kinds of cases is that we have to first consider whether the defendant's assertions are in any way credible. The prosecution does not have to disprove every wild theory from the defence.

In this case, I think the defendant is not at all credible, given his efforts to stage the crime scene, dispose of the bodies and evidence, and then effectively evade from justice for an extended period of time.

In such a case, his version should simply be discarded, except where corroborated by solid evidence.

There is simply no evidence to corroborate the idea that CC was killed in an accident for example. Indeed quite the opposite. Ditto there is no evidence RH was accidentally killed or in some kind of self defence - in my view. These are nothing more than bare assertions.

Indeed the whole defence seems to be 'why would GL do this" but that is not really a credible defence given we know he did indeed kill the victims and engage in elaborate staging.
 
Sabex said:
Wait, he was shooting slugs? Is that confirmed?
Click to expand...

No, not confirmed. I have been reading a bit about 12 gauge shotguns and deer hunting.
Either buckshot or slugs. But I really have no clue on a personal level. So I just said slug because I have only heard that fragments of metal were found. And I am thinking that buckshot is pellets.

imo
 
SouthAussie said:
No, not confirmed. I have been reading a bit about 12 gauge shotguns and deer hunting.
Either buckshot or slugs. But I really have no clue on a personal level. So I just said slug because I have only heard that fragments of metal were found. And I am thinking that buckshot is pellets.

imo
Click to expand...
It seems that the deer around that area are Sambar deer, slugs would be advantageous for those big fellas.
 
mrjitty said:
My feeling always with these kinds of cases is that we have to first consider whether the defendant's assertions are in any way credible. The prosecution does not have to disprove every wild theory from the defence.

In this case, I think the defendant is not at all credible, given his efforts to stage the crime scene, dispose of the bodies and evidence, and then effectively evade from justice for an extended period of time.

In such a case, his version should simply be discarded, except where corroborated by solid evidence.

There is simply no evidence to corroborate the idea that CC was killed in an accident for example. Indeed quite the opposite. Ditto there is no evidence RH was accidentally killed or in some kind of self defence - in my view. These are nothing more than bare assertions.

Indeed the whole defence seems to be 'why would GL do this" but that is not really a credible defence given we know he did indeed kill the victims and engage in elaborate staging.
Click to expand...

I agree whole heartedly regarding discarding GLs version of events!

To your last paragraph....
Technically, we don't actually know if GL killed both of them. We've not really come to the prosecution's evidence on that yet. At this point we only have GLs word that both deaths were accidental and that his finger wasn't on the trigger nor was his hand holding the knife that plunged into Russell's back.
 
Bats said:
I agree whole heartedly regarding discarding GLs version of events!

To your last paragraph....
Technically, we don't actually know if GL killed both of them. We've not really come to the prosecution's evidence on that yet. At this point we only have GLs word that both deaths were accidental and that his finger wasn't on the trigger nor was his hand holding the knife that plunged into Russell's back.
Click to expand...

The defense has conceded he killed them both allegedly accidently
 
mirage1 said:
With that in mind I think its actually also a bit of a stretch a airline captain out on a camping trip suddenly turned into a cold blooded murderer and executed a female witness. Its quite an extreme escalation.
Click to expand...
Yes, this may be a big part of the defense strategy: no apparent motive, no evidence of similar prior behaviour. This was a person with a high-status job, good character, etc.

However, technically I don't think juries are supposed to take these things into account. Proof of motive is not required, although prosecution usually will try to supply one because it helps the 'story' hang together.

Whether he was an airline pilot or an unemployed truck driver, the same evidence of the same events, should lead to the same jury decision. Similarly, prior convictions are not to be the basis for a new conviction, nor should non-priors override evidence...The jury receives detailed instructions on how to interpret the evidence and weigh it.

JMO
 
Last edited:
ScottToorak said:
What does give weight to the theory of a confrontation occurring is the fact that the campsite of RH & CC was always going to leave evidence of a confrontation occurring...why would GL go to the campsite of RH & CC with a loaded gun.
Click to expand...
RSBM

I think the fact that the confrontation occurred at the victim's campsite, and that the victims had no weapons, but the defendent had many, can't be explained away with fanciful stories.

Why not believe RL was just as intelligent and good under pressure as the defendent? Why/how steal someone's gun out of their vehicle and take it back to his own campsite?

JMO
 
mirage1 said:
The defense has conceded he killed them both allegedly accidently
Click to expand...

I think the defence case is that GL was present when Russell and Carol died. Not that he killed them.


"He [Dermott Dann] said much of the prosecution case, including that Mr Lynn was camping nearby to Mr Hill and Ms Clay, that he was present when they died and that he disposed of their bodies, was not in dispute."

“This is a case of two tragic accidental deaths in circumstances not of Mr Lynn’s making and not of his choosing,”

 
JBowie said:
The knife entered Hill's back? So GL claims he fell onto a knife that was pointed at his back?

I hope that police made Lynn re-enact that scenario for a video recording of it.
Click to expand...

"The court was told the two men fought again, ending when they both fell to the ground and the knife pierced Mr Hill’s chest."

 
Cedars said:
RSBM

I think the fact that the confrontation occurred at the victim's campsite, and that the victims had no weapons, but the defendent had many, can't be explained away with fanciful stories.

Why not believe RL was just as intelligent and good under pressure as the defendent? Why/how steal someone's gun out of their vehicle and take it back to his own campsite?

JMO
Click to expand...

Lynn’s statement is that Hill wasn’t happy about guns and hunting because someone known to Hill had died in a hunting accident.

This is according to Lynn.

And yet, Hill - so concerned about gun safety - goes to a strangers campsite, opens his vehicle and removes one loaded gun and then trots back to his campsite with it? Presumably to take to the police? How would that work. Hi officers I stole this guys gun? When was Hill planning on going to the police with this weapon? Hill would know Lynn would come to his campsite to get his gun back.

Just that alone defies common sense. Perhaps Hill was a grumpy man as the defence is trying to paint him. But Hill is not stupid.

Then when Lynn politely requests his gun back, Hill - the guy super concerned about gun safety according to Lynn - puts his finger on the trigger and waves the gun about wildly terrifying poor Mr Lynn!

The gun is accidentally discharged by a crazed gun safety conscious Hill, it ricochets off his cars side mirror straight into his lovers head killing her instantly!

As dearly departed Nan would say “pull the other one it plays jingle bells”

Edited to add: I forgot, that according to Lynn this all happened at night in the bush where it would be pitch black.
 
SouthAussie said:
It really seems like such a stretch for two people to be killed by "accident" in the space of probably a minute or two.
One from a ricochet and the other by falling on his own knife.

imo
Click to expand...

Only need the first one to be an accident, absent of context if you turn around and your partners been killed and there is a guy within grappling range holding a gun I'd say most of us would reach out to restrain them and control the weapon, then in a flash you've got 2 guys fighting over a deadly weapon perhaps 1 not sure what happened if they had their back turned at the time of accidental discharge, unsure if they're fighting for their life or not, GL, unsure if a distraught husband would take fatal revenge... that second killing was on purpose. Maybe under duress but intended. It's possible Carol really was a horrible accident leading to a tragic reaction from 1 or both men.

A personal anecdote. Im in security and when a fight arises out of confusion, most guys don't actually want to fight and will just match the other persons level of intensity +1, which just leads to them eventually trying quite hard and you can almost see the thought process as they start off at a 2/10 playful wrestle before escalating to a 5/10 'is he being serious?' to a 8+/10 'this is getting real I have to restrain him or I'm going to get hurt' and I can totally see if there was a fatal accident how any physical interaction between RH and GL escalated to another fatality, especially with a firearm/knife involved which neither individual would want the other to have.
 
Last edited:
Awakening said:
Lynn’s statement is that Hill wasn’t happy about guns and hunting because someone known to Hill had died in a hunting accident.

This is according to Lynn.
Click to expand...

Russell also told some other campers/hunters the previous week about the hunting accident in which someone close to Russell was killed. These campers/hunters were camped right alongside Russell. They said he was a great bloke.

I can completely understand having an aversion to guns being fired near a campground. I think I would find that very scary.
On some hunting forums I have read, they say it is really bad etiquette to do so.

IIRC there was talk about the number of deer carcasses from deer that had been killed close to the camp - when they were initially searching for Carol & Russell. Not as a pile of deer carcasses, but one every 50 metres or so.

imo


"On Wednesday, the court heard from deer hunters who met Hill while camping at King Billy No 2, a site near Mount Buller, on 12 March 2020.
Hill told them about the accidental shooting death ....."

www.theguardian.com

Greg Lynn trial: Russell Hill and Carol Clay in ‘loving relationship’ before alleged murder

Witnesses are giving evidence in trial of airline pilot who has pleaded not guilty to murdering Hill and Clay
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Last edited:
SouthAussie said:
I think the defence case is that GL was present when Russell and Carol died. Not that he killed them.


"He [Dermott Dann] said much of the prosecution case, including that Mr Lynn was camping nearby to Mr Hill and Ms Clay, that he was present when they died and that he disposed of their bodies, was not in dispute."

“This is a case of two tragic accidental deaths in circumstances not of Mr Lynn’s making and not of his choosing,”

Click to expand...

The defense is that Lynn accidently killed them. He was holding the knife and the trigger for both deaths.
 
mirage1 said:
The defense is that Lynn accidently killed them. He was holding the knife and the trigger for both deaths.
Click to expand...

"Hill had his finger on the trigger during the struggle, according to the account Lynn gave police"

"Lynn told police that Hill then came at him with a knife, screaming “she’s dead”.
"There was another struggle that saw the knife go through the chest of Hill while they were on the ground, Lynn told police."

Greg Lynn trial: pilot covered up deaths of campers Russell Hill and Carol Clay after tragic accident, lawyer tells court

"The pair then wrestled for the knife and fell to the ground, with the blade going through Mr Hill's chest and fatally wounding him, Mr Dann said." Link
 
I think GL respraying his car TWICE is very suspicious too when we consider that other persons have gone missing in the surrounding areas. The lengths that GL went to break up and burn their bones into small fragments after returning multiple times to their bodies is concerning.

He seems cunning, manipulative, calculating and controlling from everything I have read about him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 84 more.
Total: 2,816 (members: 85, guests: 2,731)

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
2,732
Total visitors
2,817
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
595,156
Messages
18,020,325
Members
229,586
Latest member
C7173
Back
Top