Jurors in the trial of alleged killer Greg Lynn have been told they cannot find the former Jetstar pilot guilty of manslaughter.
At the outset of the weeks-long trial, Justice Michael Croucher told jurors the charge of manslaughter would be before them as an alternative to murder.
But as the judge’s summing-up of the case began in the Supreme Court of Victoria on Thursday, he told jurors the circumstances of the case meant that if they were not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the murder charges, “any verdict of manslaughter in the alternative would be wrong”.
“The only charges before you are murder, and it’s for you to determine whether Mr Lynn is guilty or not guilty in relation to [Russell] Hill and whether Mr Lynn is guilty or not guilty in relation to [Carol] Clay,” the judge said.
Mr Lynn, 57, is accused of murdering retirees Russell Hill and Carol Clay at the remote campsite they shared in Victoria’s High Country in March 2020.
Both prosecution and defence lawyers agree the former Jetstar pilot tried to cover up his involvement in their deaths by setting fire to their campsite, altering his car and returning to the remote track where he dumped their bodies to set fire to their remains.
Weeks-long murder trial draws to a close
Nearly 50 people have given evidence on topics as broad as shotgun shell trajectories, telecommunications data and Mr Hill’s amateur radio use as they were called to the witness stand across about four weeks.
“It might be said we’re in the home straight,” Justice Croucher said, before giving jurors an overview of the defence and prosecution cases.
Led by Daniel Porceddu, prosecutors argued they did not know the motive or precise circumstances of the pair’s deaths, other than that Mrs Clay was shot in the head.
But they argue Mr Lynn’s conduct afterwards could only be explained by a belief he had murdered the pair.
“This subsequent behaviour, if committed in the belief that he had murdered Mr Hill and Mrs Clay, is conduct the law calls incriminating conduct,” the judge explained in summing up the prosecution case on Thursday.
Defence lawyers, led by Dermot Dann KC, argued the pair’s deaths were tragic accidents that followed separate struggles between Mr Hill and Mr Lynn for control over a knife and Mr Lynn’s 12-gauge shotgun.
“In each case, submits Mr Dann, Mr Lynn’s account of the accidental killings is consistent with numerous other items of evidence,” the judge said.
Defence lawyers argue the lack of evidence in relation to the deaths, and Mr Hill’s in particular, means Mr Lynn must be found not guilty.
Jurors told to use heads, not hearts
Justice Croucher’s instructions to jurors went into painstaking detail on Thursday as the judge explained various legal issues in the case, as well as the thresholds required to return a guilty verdict for murder.
As his address continued over the course of several hours, the judge took issue with at least two of the questions prosecutors asked of Mr Lynn when they cross-examined him on evidence he gave last week.
“There was simply no evidentiary basis for asking those questions and they should never have been asked,” the judge said of the questions, which related to Mr Lynn’s alleged shotgun use on the night of the campers’ deaths.
The judge told jurors to ignore those questions.
They were also instructed they could more readily reject some parts of the prosecution argument because of what Justice Croucher called a “breach of the basic rules of fairness”.
The breach arose from Mr Porceddu’s failure to directly put to Mr Lynn that he covered up the campers’ deaths because he believed he’d committed murder in cross-examination, despite relying on that allegation in his closing argument, the judge said.
“Had Mr Porceddu asked Mr Lynn these questions, Mr Lynn may well have been able to respond in a powerful and compelling way,” he continued.
“Yet he has been denied that opportunity by the conduct of the prosecutor.”
Jurors were reminded to ignore any media coverage, abstain from any research and overlook any sympathy, bias or prejudice as they determined the case.
The judge said that included ignoring any “great sympathy” they may naturally feel for the deceased lovers or their loved ones, any belief their secret affair was “morally wrong” or any feeling that Mr Lynn’s behaviour in covering up their deaths was “terrible”.
“You must weigh the evidence logically and with an open mind, and not according to your passions or feelings or personal judgements about what is morally acceptable or morally unacceptable,” the judge said.
“Your function and your duty is to use your heads, not your hearts.”
A series of other instructions was delivered to the jurors, including that several instances of “objectionable” behaviour by Mr Lynn — including stealing money from the wallet of the deceased or improperly storing a firearm – were not to be treated as proof of the prosecution case.
The judge’s summing up of the trial will continue into Friday.
Posted , updated