Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #6 *Arrest*

[Ellery84]

Here’s a rough timeline published November 3, 2023. I think the Daily Mail published one also.

Saturday July 29 - the lunch.
Saturday July 29 later in the evening and early hours Sunday morning all four guests go to hospitals in Leongatha and Korumburra. All four are then transferred to Austin.

Sunday and Monday July 30 and 31 Erin goes to hospital in Leongatha presenting with suspected food poisoning. She’s transferred to Monash Medical Centre.

Friday August 4 Gail and Heather die.

How a sleepy Gippsland town made global headlines after a mushroom lunch allegedly killed three guests

A beef wellington lunch allegedly led to three deaths and a small south-east Victorian community in shock. Now the host has been charged with murder. Here's how it all unfolded.

www.abc.net.au

Erin fed her kids the leftovers the next evening, Sunday. I doubt she was ill at that point so it seems likely she was aware of her four guests falling ill before she went to hospital herself.

It’s a little odd IMO that her symptoms showed up so much later. I’d expect that she would have tasted the Wellington as she prepared it. Yet she went to hospital about a day after her guests became ill enough to be taken to the regional poison center.

JMO it would be easy to go to hospital and claim that she was vomiting and had diarrhea. Doctors couldn’t very well demand she prove it.
All MOO

So on July 29, all 4 guests attend hospital with some sort of alleged food poisoning symptoms.

And it’s that night Erin gets the bright idea to feed her kids leftovers of the lunch that all 4 guests ate.

That doesn’t sound like a great idea, really, does it.

IMO

 

[Ellery84]

Going off my memory here, but I don't think any of the three had died by the time EP was released. I thought it was 2-3-4 days later that they died.

MOO though.

Yep, you’re right.

 

[DeDee]

Sure:

“A committal mention is the second step in the committal process, occurring after a filing hearing and before a full committal hearing. In Victoria, serious crimes (called indictable offences) generally proceed through the committal stream, beginning in the Magistrates’ Court. During committal proceedings, the Magistrates’ Court, where charges are initially filed.

At a committal mention, your lawyer will indicate to the court whether you intend to plead guilty or not guilty in relation to your matter. This will only occur once your lawyer has considered the brief of evidence concerning the charges against you.

The magistrate may offer a summary hearing, commit the accused for trial in a higher court, determine an application to cross-examine witnesses or make other orders or directions.”

@ch_13


Committal Mention | Dribbin & Brown Criminal Lawyers

Thank you! On May 4, you say? This sounds like a v important legal event with a lot of breadth and leeway for the magistrate.

"The magistrate may offer a summary hearing, commit the accused for trial in a higher court, determine an application to cross-examine witnesses or make other orders or directions.”

What are the chances of EP's case being kicked up to a higher court?

 

[MsMarple]

So on July 29, all 4 guests attend hospital with some sort of alleged food poisoning symptoms.

And it’s that night Erin gets the bright idea to feed her kids leftovers of the lunch that all 4 guests ate.

That doesn’t sound like a great idea, really, does it.

IMO

Yeah, unfortunately the timeline doesn’t include the actual times people began feeling sick but it was about 24 hours after the Saturday lunch that Erin fed her kids the leftovers. So it’s unlikely she was feeling ill enough yet to go to hospital. We also don’t know if she ate leftovers with them.

Hopefully we’ll learn more at the next hearing as there are many questions still. Does Australian law include the equivalent of a probable cause affidavit like we have in the U.S.? And if so is it ever made public?

 

[Auntie Cipation]

So on July 29, all 4 guests attend hospital with some sort of alleged food poisoning symptoms.

And it’s that night Erin gets the bright idea to feed her kids leftovers of the lunch that all 4 guests ate.

That doesn’t sound like a great idea, really, does it.

IMO

My jaw just dropped at the implications of what you've just said here.

If it suggests what I think it does -- that EP *knew* her guests had fallen ill at the time she fed leftover BW to her kids (which has presumably been corroborated by the children in their LE interviews)?

So either she's completely innocent AND, when informed that all four of her guests fell ill shortly after leaving her home, never considered there might be ANY problem with the meal she just served, blithely giving it (after scraping off some mushrooms) to her own children

OR

She's NOT innocent, and had made a second BW which was fed to the children (and possibly herself), or some other scheme to make it LOOK like she fed her kids the same food as her guests therefore she must be innocent.

MOO

 

[MsMarple]

To add, something I’d forgotten: Erin went to hospital on July 30, was released then returned on July 31. No times given.

She said she was transported by ambulance from the Leongatha Hospital to the Monash Medical Centre in Melbourne on July 31.

The Gippsland Southern Health Service confirmed a fifth person who presented at Leongatha Hospital on July 30 with suspected food poisoning later returned and was sent to Monash.

Woman who cooked suspected poisoned meal details where she bought mushrooms

The woman who cooked a meal that is believed to have contained poisonous mushrooms and led to the deaths of three people gives a lengthy written statement to police detailing her account of what happened, and revealing she was hospitalised after the incident.

www.abc.net.au

The Department of Health contacted her at some point and she informed them about buying mushrooms at the unknown Asian market and local supermarket. She gave the hospital toxicologist what was left of the lunch. No time given but by then it appears doctors were suspicious that poisonous mushrooms were involved, maybe from talking with the relatives?

 

[Salah11]

Also why did she not take her kids to hospital with her as they had also eaten the same toxic dish according to her story?

That doesn’t add up either imo

 

[Lady Bug]

Also why did she not take her kids to hospital with her as they had also eaten the same toxic dish according to her story?

That doesn’t add up either imo

Do we know that she didn't?

 

[Salah11]

Do we know that she didn't?

It’s never been reported and she never mentioned it and that would give her story more credibility so im going to say she didn’t.

If you can find information that says she did I will of course stand corrected.

 

[MsMarple]

It’s never been reported and she never mentioned it and that would give her story more credibility so im going to say she didn’t.

If you can find information that says she did I will of course stand corrected.

I agree. Erin included her trip to hospital in her statement, omitting the part where they initially sent her home and she had to return before the doctors decided to give her a “liver protection drug.” To me (so JMO) they did so based more on her four guests becoming critically ill than her symptoms. But only my own opinion.

JMO if she had concerns about her children wouldn’t she have included something in her statement? My personal opinion is that she slipped up. As a mom I would have taken my kids to hospital for doses of that liver protection drug even if they weren’t showing symptoms.

As linked above, the Gippsland Southern Health Service reported that an individual (EP) made two visits to Leongatha hospital but made no mention of two minors also being seen or given treatment. Based on that IMO Erin had little to no concern about her children being poisoned.

And of course new information could contradict my opinion but as it stands I believe Erin’s story is flawed. MOO

 

[Lady Bug]

According to this 7 News report EP's statement contained inconsistencies.

We could make guesses as to what those inconsistencies are based on deductions. For example; perhaps the children didn't eat the leftovers or perhaps the inconsistencies are about Simon and his mystery illness. These things are not yet facts.

One thing we do know for a fact though is that she gave leftovers to the Health Dept for toxicology testing when she could have easily said there were no leftovers.

"7 News understands relatives of the victims are concerned the statement released has several inconsistencies to what they know."

 

[Salah11]

According to this 7 News report EP's statement contained inconsistencies.

We could make guesses as to what those inconsistencies are based on deductions. For example; perhaps the children didn't eat the leftovers or perhaps the inconsistencies are about Simon and his mystery illness. These things are not yet facts.

One thing we do know for a fact though is that she gave leftovers to the Health Dept for toxicology testing when she could have easily said there were no leftovers.

"7 News understands relatives of the victims are concerned the statement released has several inconsistencies to what they know."

We don’t know what she actually gave them though. Just because she gave them leftovers doesn’t mean it’s from that fatal lunch.

There was likely more than one dish imo

 

[Lady Bug]

We don’t know what she actually gave them though. Just because she gave them leftovers doesn’t mean it’s from that fatal lunch.

There was likely more than one dish imo

Yes I agree. She may not have given them left overs at all....we don't know.

Either she gave the kids leftovers because she didn't know they contained poisonous mushrooms and miraculously they didn't fall ill.
or
She didn't give the kids leftovers for dinner at all because a) she knew they were poisonous or b) they didn't like mushrooms. And she made a consciousness of guilt lie that they had the beef wellington to cover either an accident or a crime.
IMO

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I haven't ruled out it being an accident of some kind.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

Yes I agree. She may not have given them left overs at all....we don't know.

Either she gave the kids leftovers because she didn't know they contained poisonous mushrooms and miraculously they didn't fall ill.
or
She didn't give the kids leftovers for dinner at all because a) she knew they were poisonous or b) they didn't like mushrooms. And she made a consciousness of guilt lie that they had the beef wellington to cover either an accident or a crime.
IMO

Respectfully, the kids aren't babies -- they would know what leftovers are, and what beef wellington is, and whether they were served either/both.

Of course we are not privy to what they told LE, but if they had affirmed that they were served an unrelated meal, I suspect EP would have been arrested much sooner.

So I think the most likely option is a third one you didn't mention -- that there were TWO beef wellingtons, and they were served "leftovers" from the untainted one (perhaps EP found a way to feed herself from the untainted one as well during her hostess lunch, and the trip to the hospital was based on fictitious stomach problems).

Or, as we discussed earlier in the thread, the poisonous mushrooms weren't actually in the beef wellington but in some other part of the meal (gravy, some vegetable side dish, etc) and thus the BW could be eaten by the children and tested by the hospital without revealing the poison.

All MOO

 

[NCWatcher]

I agree. Erin included her trip to hospital in her statement, omitting the part where they initially sent her home and she had to return before the doctors decided to give her a “liver protection drug.” To me (so JMO) they did so based more on her four guests becoming critically ill than her symptoms. But only my own opinion.

JMO if she had concerns about her children wouldn’t she have included something in her statement? My personal opinion is that she slipped up. As a mom I would have taken my kids to hospital for doses of that liver protection drug even if they weren’t showing symptoms.

As linked above, the Gippsland Southern Health Service reported that an individual (EP) made two visits to Leongatha hospital but made no mention of two minors also being seen or given treatment. Based on that IMO Erin had little to no concern about her children being poisoned.

And of course new information could contradict my opinion but as it stands I believe Erin’s story is flawed. MOO

I have not followed this case closely, I admit. I've flitted in & out alot reading the comments here but have missed many days. Perhaps this has been discussed, but:

IF EP went to the hospital complaining of possible symptoms and

IF, as many here seems to suggest, her treatment was at least partly based on the fact other people who had been her guests were already hospitalized with potential symptoms related to some sort of food poisoning

Wouldn't hospital staff have asked EP who else ate what she had eaten? (Like her children?) And wouldn't her response have normally been recorded/charted? At least in the US in cases of suspected "group" food poisoning, hospital staff usually don't wait for new patients to volunteer who else might have eaten the food that might be causing illness. So IF hospital staff said she made no mention of two minors...what does that mean? When asked she said nobody else ate the food OR she didn't happen to mention/spontaneously volunteer that her kids had also eaten it?
Moo

 

[MsMarple]

Respectfully, the kids aren't babies -- they would know what leftovers are, and what beef wellington is, and whether they were served either/both.

Of course we are not privy to what they told LE, but if they had affirmed that they were served an unrelated meal, I suspect EP would have been arrested much sooner.

So I think the most likely option is a third one you didn't mention -- that there were TWO beef wellingtons, and they were served "leftovers" from the untainted one (perhaps EP found a way to feed herself from the untainted one as well during her hostess lunch, and the trip to the hospital was based on fictitious stomach problems).

Or, as we discussed earlier in the thread, the poisonous mushrooms weren't actually in the beef wellington but in some other part of the meal (gravy, some vegetable side dish, etc) and thus the BW could be eaten by the children and tested by the hospital without revealing the poison.

All MOO

Good point! Although IMO she needed the hospital toxicologist to find death caps in the scraps in order to push her narrative of buying dried mushrooms from some Asian market she wasn’t able to identify, implying that the package was tainted. If no death caps were found then it might be suspected that she deliberately incorporated the mushrooms in some other dish or even supplied a decoy dish to the toxicologist. She needed to steer blame away from herself IMO.

At no point has she ever claimed to have foraged the mushrooms which IMO was a mistake. There are other cases of people mistaking poisonous mushrooms that caused illness or death. Erin might have avoided arrest if she had played out a case of mistaken identification.

JMO Erin tried to be too clever. Maybe she thought she could outwit LE. Maybe she was concerned that the relatives of the four guests (including Simon) would bring a wrongful death suit and threaten her financially.
All MOO

 

[Lady Bug]

Respectfully, the kids aren't babies -- they would know what leftovers are, and what beef wellington is, and whether they were served either/both.

Of course we are not privy to what they told LE, but if they had affirmed that they were served an unrelated meal, I suspect EP would have been arrested much sooner.

So I think the most likely option is a third one you didn't mention -- that there were TWO beef wellingtons, and they were served "leftovers" from the untainted one (perhaps EP found a way to feed herself from the untainted one as well during her hostess lunch, and the trip to the hospital was based on fictitious stomach problems).

Or, as we discussed earlier in the thread, the poisonous mushrooms weren't actually in the beef wellington but in some other part of the meal (gravy, some vegetable side dish, etc) and thus the BW could be eaten by the children and tested by the hospital without revealing the poison.

All MOO

Yes. The children would know if they were served leftovers and if mushrooms had been scraped off or not. In the News video I linked above about "inconsistencies noted by relatives" - it could be the children who are pointing out the inconsistencies. IMO

It won't come as a surprise if the evidence shows there were a number of beef wellingtons maybe even individual beef wellingtons. However, the theory that she put death caps in one bw and not another because she didn't want to poison the children doesn't quite fit IF the children don't like mushrooms. In that scenario she would make a separate one for the children which contained no mushrooms at all IMO.

A gravy containing the poisonous mushrooms is a strong possibility and answers a numbers questions. My understanding is that the toxicology test results indicating the meal contained death cap mushrooms came from the leftovers? Happy to be corrected. IMO giving the poisonous leftovers up for testing isn't consistent with hiding a crime.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

Good point! Although IMO she needed the hospital toxicologist to find death caps in the scraps in order to push her narrative of buying dried mushrooms from some Asian market she wasn’t able to identify, implying that the package was tainted

Yes, I agree. I got a bit confused there, partly because -- I guess I never saw it confirmed anywhere that there WAS indeed poison found in her leftovers -- wasn't she initially claiming the poison couldn't have come from her lunch at all?

 

[Kemug]

I have not followed this case closely, I admit. I've flitted in & out alot reading the comments here but have missed many days. Perhaps this has been discussed, but:

IF EP went to the hospital complaining of possible symptoms and

IF, as many here seems to suggest, her treatment was at least partly based on the fact other people who had been her guests were already hospitalized with potential symptoms related to some sort of food poisoning

Wouldn't hospital staff have asked EP who else ate what she had eaten? (Like her children?) And wouldn't her response have normally been recorded/charted? At least in the US in cases of suspected "group" food poisoning, hospital staff usually don't wait for new patients to volunteer who else might have eaten the food that might be causing illness. So IF hospital staff said she made no mention of two minors...what does that mean? When asked she said nobody else ate the food OR she didn't happen to mention/spontaneously volunteer that her kids had also eaten it?
Moo

Sounds fishy to me.