The 17 issues in Greg Lynn’s trial: court

Lawyers acting for a former pilot accused of murdering two elderly campers have flagged 17 issues they claim are emblematic of the “completely hopeless” case, a jury has heard.

Over two days this week, defence barrister Dermot Dann KC used his final opportunity to address the jury, saying the trial had been marked by a series of “increasingly desperate” manoeuvres by the prosecution.

His client, Gregory Stuart Lynn, 57, is facing trial in Victoria’s Supreme Court after pleading not guilty to murdering Russell Hill, 74, and Carol Clay, 73, in March 2020.

Prosecutors allege the former Jetstar captain killed the couple without lawful excuse at Bucks Camp in the Wonnangatta Valley, a day after they arrived for a camping trip on March 19.

From the outset, the lawyers argued that while they could not prove the precise circumstances of the deaths, other than that Mrs Clay was shot in the head, Mr Lynn’s actions in obliterating evidence and later burning their bodies could only be explained by a belief he murdered them.

Mr Lynn’s defence, on the other hand, have argued the jury should accept his account of two tragic accidental deaths.

On the defence case, Mr Lynn panicked fearing he would be wrongly blamed and set about trying to hide his involvement but, ultimately, only made things worse.

Mr Dann said the prosecutions case over the past month had bumbled and stumbled “unmistakably into the category of hopeless”, pointing to 17 “lowlights” he ran through in descending order.

17) The A-pillar theory

The defence lawyer said prosecutors had posed a “half-baked” theory to Mr Lynn when he was in the witness box last week that if Mr Lynn was holding the gun at the angle he claimed, the bullet would have hit the A-pillar of Mr Hill’s vehicle.

On Mr Lynn’s account, his shotgun discharged as the two men wrestled for control, piercing the side mirror of Mr Hill’s Toyota LandCruiser and killing Mrs Clay.

Mr Dann said crown prosecutor Daniel Porceddu had pulled the theory out of thin air with no evidence whatsoever.

It’s quite amazing. It’s not based on geometry,” he said.

“It’s an insult to the ancient Greek mathematicians who fathered geometry.”

16) Mr Hill’s history with firearms

Mr Dann said prosecutors had failed to adduce any evidence of Mr Hill’s knowledge or previous use of guns, saying it was a “central part” of his client’s account.

On Mr Lynn’s account, Mr Hill had stolen his shotgun after a dispute, loaded it and fired a warning shot before the fatal struggle.

The barrister said it had been left to defence to question Mr Hill’s wife, Robyn, and daughter, Deborah, who revealed he’d previously been gifted a shotgun after his dad retired.

“He doesn’t want you to know about this man’s past use of guns,” Mr Dann said.

“It doesn’t suit their account and their half-baked theories, so we won’t ask any questions about that.”

15) Mr Hill’s mental health issues

Mr Dann told the jury the prosecution had been “perfectly happy” to present Mr Hill as a man who’s at peace with the world, when the situation was more complicated.

He said it had been left to defence to ask Mrs Hill about her husband’s prescription medication and battle with depression.

“Do you think that was a pleasant thing that we had to do? Of course not,” he said.

“But they don’t want you to hear that the picture is a lot more complicated than that.”

14) The 1994 shooting death of Mr Hill’s relative

Mr Dann told the court part of his client’s account was being confronted by Mr Hill who accused him of hunting too close to camp.

He said again it fell on the defence “almost entirely” to elicit information about the accidental death of Gary Hill within the same valley.

“Maybe the concept of an accidental shooting death near Bucks Camp was a bit close to home for the prosecution to really want to explore in any great detail at all,” the barrister said.

13) Mr Hill’s ‘I make the rules’ attitude

Mr Dann said Mr Hill had a long connection to the Wonnangatta Valley, and the evidence that emerged at trial suggested he felt he had a “policing-type” role.

He questioned why Mr Hill had a map in his car marking the areas where deer could and could not be hunted, if he was not a hunter himself.

“What other purpose can it possibly have?” Mr Dann questioned.

“On Mr Lynn’s account, he took issue with him about Mr Lynn’s hunting activities.”

12) The drone

The defence barrister said another “lowlight” was the evidence produced by the prosecution about a rude drone flying over the head of another camper.

“What was the purpose of that, other than to chew up a bit of time?” he questioned.

“What possibly could be the purpose when the informant says to us in evidence, that couldn’t be Mr Hill’s drone.”

11) Mr Hill and Mrs Clay’s tent configuration

Mr Dann told the jury the prosecution had called a fire expert, George Xydias, who, in part, gave evidence about the configuration of the camper’s tent.

On the stand Mr Xydias said it was possibly a “L-shaped” tent, but Mr Dann said the prosecution knew this was wrong.

“They’ve got the manufacturer of the tent,” he said.

“So what on Earth are they doing, allowing Mr Xydias to give that evidence?”

10) The ‘Vacuum Theory’

Mr Dann told the jury that in the third week of the trial, a police blood splatter expert had detailed a “vacuum theory” to explain why he tested the inside of Mr Lynn’s shotgun for DNA.

The forensic officer, Mark Gellatly, said there was a theory that blood could be sucked into the barrel if the gun was fired at a close distance.

Mr Dann said this had “zero relevance” to the trial and Mr Gellatly was unqualified to give evidence on a topic he had no expertise in.

“So what on earth was he doing three weeks into a murder trial bringing that up, the vacuum theory?” he questioned.

“It’s a pretty distasteful spectacle.”

9) Failure to adduce trajectory shot evidence

Mr Dann said the next lowlight, was the failure of prosecutors to ask ballistics expert Paul Griffiths “a single question” about trajectory testing he had undertaken.

The jury heard after Mr Lynn’s arrest, police had requested testing of his account to see if angles were possible.

Mr Dann said it was found to be plausible if Mrs Clay was standing, but “spot on” if she was crouching as Mr Lynn had detailed.

“The prosecution in examination-in-chief don’t ask him a single question about his trajectory test,” he said.

“Why do you think that might be? Because they don’t help. They support Mr Lynn’s version, so they’re just jettisoned.”

8) The deflection test

Mr Dann said the prosecution had similarly failed to ask Mr Griffiths about testing he had done to see if a car mirror would deflect a gunshot.

The jury heard that 13 out of 14 tests demonstrated less than one degree deflection.

“Completely in line with what Mr Lynn is saying,” Mr Dann said.

7) Prosecution invented bullet spraying scenario

Mr Dann told the jury that when his client was on the stand, Mr Porceddu had alleged he shot at Mrs Clay multiple times.

“Just because you’re the prosecution … that doesn’t give you a licence just to make things up,” he said.

“Spraying bullets at her – where does that come from? It comes straight out of someone’s imagination.”

6) Item 55’s location

The jury heard that in March 2022 —two years after the deaths — police discovered a twisted shot with traces of Mrs Clay’s DNA at Bucks Camp.

The lead fragment, which came to be known as item 55, was found to be a solid shot from a 12-gauge shotgun.

In the prosecution’s closing address, Mr Porceddu said any suggestion by defence the item was moved was “ridiculous”.

Mr Dann took aim at this statement, saying the defence were being criticised for trying to assist the jury.

“It’s self-evident from the photos that that lead fragment has been recently moved,” he said.

“Things like that happen. You don’t take a simplistic view.”

5) The ‘flimsy rope theory’

Mr Dann said at the end of the trial, prosecutors had raised the claim Mr Lynn, if his account was true, would have been “hopelessly entangled” in a guy rope between Mr Hill’s vehicle and a portable toilet.

He said it was a “perfect metaphor” for the prosecution case.

Mr Dann said even the police investigators did not think the rope was a matter of any significance and had not asked Mr Lynn in their interview.

“You shouldn’t worry about that issue whatsoever,” he said.

4) ‘No case’ for Mr Hill’s murder

Mr Dann told the jury they were asked to find Mr Lynn had murdered Mr Hill when there was no “factual basis” for the charge.

“There’s on the prosecution case, zero factual foundation, zero motive, just a complete blank,” he said.

“Does that sit well with any of you?”

He told the jury his client did not dispute he had destroyed evidence and hidden Mr Hill’s body, but questioned how they could convict for murder without evidence.

“What you do have is Mr Lynn telling you what happened to Mr Hill, telling you about the struggle over the knife,” he said.

“Was he challenged about that evidence? No.”

3) ‘No case’ for Mrs Clay’s murder

Mr Dann said the same fundamental problems existed in respect of charge 2, Mrs Clay’s murder.

He said, on the prosecution case, there was zero evidence to show she was killed second as a witness to Mr Hill’s murder.

“It’s like the flimsy rope theory and the A-pillar theory, it’s just a theory,” he said.

Mr Dann told the his client had been “overcharged”, saying there was an overwhelming case for the alternative offence of destruction of evidence.

2) Prosecutors failed to challenge Mr Lynn on why he destroyed evidence

Mr Dann told the jury that with a lack of evidence, the prosecution had turned to Mr Lynn’s “terrible” conduct after the deaths to argue the only reasonable explanation for those actions was murder.

But, he said, the ran into a roadblock when Mr Lynn explained he destroyed the campsite and hid the bodies because he feared he would be wrongly blamed.

“You’ve got to put yourselves in Mr Lynn’s shoes, presuming of course that he’s innocent,” he said.

“To use Mr Porceddu’s word, was that fanciful that he thought he might be wrongly blamed?”

Mr Dann said the prosecution had 2 and a half years to prepare for Mr Lynn to take the stand and grill him, but when he did, the failed to do so.

“He didn’t ask him a single question. Why do you think that might have been?” he said.

“He knew he wasn’t going to get anywhere. He threw in the towel. It was all too hard.”

The final address

Mr Dann said the “lowest lowlight” was the final address by Mr Porceddu that breached fairness rules by not putting allegations to Mr Lynn.

He listed out 20 statements made by the prosecutor that he claimed his client had not been able to respond to.

“The prosecution just turned their back completely on that rule,” he said.

“Maybe things were that bleak and that desperate for them.”

These included claims Mr Hill and Mrs Clay’s affair was irrelevant to the case, a claim he had always planned to obliterate their bodies and a suggestion Mr Lynn’s car light would have come one if Mr Hill stole his shotgun.

“We can’t just turn our backs on the rule of law and say this was a tragedy,” he said.

“That just is a recipe for injustice, chaos, and tyranny. It just can’t happen.”

The trial will resume on Monday as jurors continue deliberating verdicts.