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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dermot Dann KC, said his client had made a 'series of terrible choices' fearing he would be wrongly blamed

A series of terrible choices to me is like getting takeout too many nights a week... not burning down a campsite and disposing of two bodies but what do I know
 
Last edited:
(ooops, wrong thread)
 
Last edited:

Justin Stein’s DNA found on rifle which was buried near property where Charlise Mutten disappeared, jury told​



This pay-walled DT article has some extra details:

I think this is meant for the other thread?
 
I just started following this case, so I apologize for the late question. I read that the police placed recording devices in the defendant’s home. If that’s true, how do they obtain access?
I meant how did they physically access the house to install the listening devices without anyone knowing.
Years ago I worked at a place where I was bound by the Official Secrets Act and breaking the rules could mean 5 years’ imprisonment, so this may apply to your son. I then worked at an extremely secretive government agency where I spent the last 15 years before I retired, and they were the most exciting years of my working life.

At both places I transcribed LD product from homes, cars and outdoor locations. The work was indescribably hard as there was invariably background noise. If it was critically important, e.g. catching a person's name, can you imagine listening to one sentence over and over even if it took several hours? LD product can be the greatest invasion of privacy you could ever imagine and can be disgusting and extremely shocking.

LE agencies, whether the police or other agencies, have to produce a detailed sworn affidavit to a judge setting out the reasons why an LD is necessary. If the application is granted, he will issue a warrant authorising the use of the device.

Prior to installing an LD, surveillance was carried out to establish if there was a pattern as to when the home was usually vacant or occupied. If no-one was home, investigators would then break and enter the premises. It was potentially dangerous as someone could turn up unexpectedly. I don’t know how they were able to access a home through a locked door or window but I’m guessing they must have used someone with lockpicking skills, but technology has advanced and things may be done differently now. I won’t disclose where devices were usually placed in homes and I never knew where they were placed in cars.

I hope this helps.
 
I think whoever was placing the bugs in a house would most likely not wear a police uniform or look like detectives.
Maybe they would dress like tradies.

But I think the more likely is what others have posted. Go in pairs to intervew a POI, keep them occupied while the other plants the bugs.

Anyone turning up to a house otherwise is bound to get back to the occupant.
Ie a neighbour may notice a stranger actually going inside the house, and later tell the occupant what they saw.
 
Years ago I worked at a place where I was bound by the Official Secrets Act and breaking the rules could mean 5 years’ imprisonment, so this may apply to your son. I then worked at an extremely secretive government agency where I spent the last 15 years before I retired, and they were the most exciting years of my working life.

At both places I transcribed LD product from homes, cars and outdoor locations. The work was indescribably hard as there was invariably background noise. If it was critically important, e.g. catching a person's name, can you imagine listening to one sentence over and over even if it took several hours? LD product can be the greatest invasion of privacy you could ever imagine and can be disgusting and extremely shocking.

LE agencies, whether the police or other agencies, have to produce a detailed sworn affidavit to a judge setting out the reasons why an LD is necessary. If the application is granted, he will issue a warrant authorising the use of the device.

Prior to installing an LD, surveillance was carried out to establish if there was a pattern as to when the home was usually vacant or occupied. If no-one was home, investigators would then break and enter the premises. It was potentially dangerous as someone could turn up unexpectedly. I don’t know how they were able to access a home through a locked door or window but I’m guessing they must have used someone with lockpicking skills, but technology has advanced and things may be done differently now. I won’t disclose where devices were usually placed in homes and I never knew where they were placed in cars.

I hope this helps.

I want this job!
 
I think whoever was placing the bugs in a house would most likely not wear a police uniform or look like detectives.
Maybe they would dress like tradies.

But I think the more likely is what others have posted. Go in pairs to intervew a POI, keep them occupied while the other plants the bugs.

Anyone turning up to a house otherwise is bound to get back to the occupant.
Ie a neighbour may notice a stranger actually going inside the house, and later tell the occupant what they saw.

Probably these days there’s ways to access technology remotely and install a listening device or LD as the pros call it. ;)
 
Reading this article, Dermot Dann was cross examining Leading Senior Constable Leah Thowless about the metal fragment found at the campsite, and why Russell's bones weren't found at the campsite.

The officer responded that she couldn't comment on how it arrived at that position (metal fragment) and couldn't comment on that (about the bones).

The difference between a well-practised police officer who is accustomed to not getting trapped by the defence into giving more info than is required, and public witnesses who feel they have to answer completely. imo

 
Probably these days there’s ways to access technology remotely and install a listening device or LD as the pros call it.
Yes I know ;)

I read an indepth article a couple of years ago. It went into all the details of how they can bug houses without needing to actually have access to inside the house. It was an eye opener.

I'm sworn to secrecy of course :)
 
A series of terrible choices to me is like getting takeout too many nights a week... not burning down a campsite and disposing of two bodies but what do I know

Yes, your analogy is a good one Stacey and I'm sure those types of thoughts will be with jurors as well.

Often in murder trials, defence teams keeps quiet and put the onus on a prosecution to prove the intent...its theirs to prove, which can be tricky in some cases. The defence will just chime in when necessary to sow the seed of doubt.

Quite different here! The defence has needed to describe in detail the accused's 'story' of what has happened. In this case, it means that the prosecution won't need to provide the exact details of what happened....just that two people are dead and that it couldn't have happen the way the defence are describing.

If the prosecution can highlight the ridiculousness, then the obviousness of what has happened will be clear.

The account of the deaths is either a lie or it isn't.

JMO
 
Last edited:
Yes I know ;)

I read an indepth article a couple of years ago. It went into all the details of how they can bug houses without needing to actually have access to inside the house. It was an eye opener.

I'm sworn to secrecy of course :)

I was just theorising. Wasn’t sure if I’d been watching too many movies!
 
Yes I know ;)

I read an indepth article a couple of years ago. It went into all the details of how they can bug houses without needing to actually have access to inside the house. It was an eye opener.

I'm sworn to secrecy of course :)
It's ok, you can trust me! Just between you, me and a few other websleuthers!
 
I think whoever was placing the bugs in a house would most likely not wear a police uniform or look like detectives.
Maybe they would dress like tradies.

But I think the more likely is what others have posted. Go in pairs to intervew a POI, keep them occupied while the other plants the bugs.

Anyone turning up to a house otherwise is bound to get back to the occupant.
Ie a neighbour may notice a stranger actually going inside the house, and later tell the occupant what they saw.

Our investigators never wore uniforms when they were installing LDs, but they never wore them at the two places I worked either, just ordinary street clothes.

Edited to add that the investigators (all previously detectives) weren't current serving members of LE.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how bugs would be placed in homes now that more people have CCTV around the perimeter. Even with careful surveillance of who's home, a ring doorbell or camera could alert the person to someone entering.

My guess is if the suspect is renting they could pretend it's landlord maintenance. Maybe even those door to door people with the free government supplied electricity meters or door seals.

Would love to know!
 
I wonder how bugs would be placed in homes now that more people have CCTV around the perimeter. Even with careful surveillance of who's home, a ring doorbell or camera could alert the person to someone entering.

My guess is if the suspect is renting they could pretend it's landlord maintenance. Maybe even those door to door people with the free government supplied electricity meters or door seals.

Would love to know!
I’d say it’s via phone, alexis Etc. you know how you say something and suddenly you get loads of ads about it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
1,181
Total visitors
1,363

Forum statistics

Threads
596,514
Messages
18,048,938
Members
230,019
Latest member
Loretti11
Back
Top