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

[Tweet57]

She seems like a really bad Liar imo

It would be quite easy to prove the kids were at home and not the movies so why lie about it unless it’s part of the mystery of why she poisoned 4 people that lunch time ?

Why lie? Very weird.

 

[SouthAussie]

Omg the children were there! Well that’s just very, very interesting.

I’m really glad police are thoroughly investigating. I think back to how meticulous the Cleo Smith investigation was, and I’d like to see an investigation of that calibre here, and I’m sure we will.

VICPOL have been exceptional in every case of theirs that I have followed here. It might have taken a couple of years to pin the perp down, but they have managed it in each case.

(eg: The solved murders that I can think of right away .... Kylie Blackwood, Jill Meagher, Sarah Cafferkey, Karen Ristevski, Russell Hill and Carol Clay)

 

[Salah11]

Could Lunch off been about Custody of the kids?


Trying to think of reasons why you would poison 4 people and that’s seems like it would be quite high.



IMO

 

[SouthAussie]

Just want to mention, also, that every paywalled article that I read bears a disclaimer that they are not suggesting that EP deliberately served toxic mushrooms, they are just reporting on the facts of the case.

 

[jepop]

She seems like a really bad Liar imo

It would be quite easy to prove the kids were at home and not the movies so why lie about it unless it’s part of the mystery of why she poisoned 4 people that lunch time ?

Wish I could see the Herald Sun's sources and the wording conveying the police's current position. For instance, all it might mean is that police have not released another statement after their initial one, since EP's statement came out. If so that does not necessarily indicate that they haven't changed their position- only that they haven't made public what their current position is on that question. I'd like to see a verified police source referred to in the Herald's report stating that police have said, lets say yesterday, that EP's kids were at the house during the lunch and their understanding of that remains unchanged. Moo

 

[SouthAussie]

Wish I could see the Herald Sun's sources and the wording conveying the police's current position. For instance, all it might mean is that police have not released another statement after their initial one, since EP's statement came out. If so that does not necessarily indicate that they haven't changed their position- only that they haven't made public what their current position is on that question. I'd like to see a verified police source referred to in the Herald's report stating that police have said, lets say yesterday, that EP's kids were at the house during the lunch and their understanding of that remains unchanged. Moo

I can't quote (due to TOS) but it does say that police have not publicly changed their position.

Either the kids were there, or perhaps the police want to keep the pressure on and keep her talking.
A police source said - in the HS article - that EP issuing a statement (presumably as opposed to providing them with a useful interview) is her trying to control the narrative.

There has certainly got to be some very suspicious things for EP to have been named a suspect by the police. Maybe this is one of them?

One of the articles (The Australian) says that EP is a smart woman, but that both sides of the fence are shadowed by contradictions.

 

[JLZ]

Could Lunch off been about Custody of the kids?


Trying to think of reasons why you would poison 4 people and that’s seems like it would be quite high.



IMO

But it's not as though those four would be deciding who gets custody. Poison 4 people because you don't like their mere opinion?

 

[jepop]

I can't quote (due to TOS) but it does say that police have not publicly changed their position.

Either the kids were there, or perhaps the police want to keep the pressure on and keep her talking.
A police source said - in the HS article - that EP issuing a statement (presumably as opposed to providing them with a useful interview) is her trying to control the narrative.

There has certainly got to be some very suspicious things for EP to have been named a suspect by the police. Maybe this is one of them?

One of the articles (The Australian) says that EP is a smart woman, but that both sides of the fence are shadowed by contradictions.

Thanks very much for clarifying. Appreciate your efforts paraphrasing these articles.

 

[SouthAussie]

But it's not as though those four would be deciding who gets custody. Poison 4 people because you don't like their mere opinion?

Articles keep referring to this "dysfunctional family". And a past article that I paraphrased said that the Baptist church members said Simon's parents wouldn't be happy about a reconciliation.

What if Simon has been to Social Services .... "she tried to poison me, I have lived there to protect my children, I want to get me and the children out of there"?

Maybe the pastor and his family wanted to talk her into letting the children go, and not go to Family Court.

(Just a hypothetical, because we don't really know what was going on in the family. I don't have a personal position about it.)

 

[Salah11]

But it's not as though those four would be deciding who gets custody. Poison 4 people because you don't like their mere opinion?

Well what if the Ex husband had decided he wanted full custody and it was going to get nasty?


People don’t always react normally when confronted with things

Look at that freaky wall I know some believe it’s normal but I don’t and seems like not all was well IMO

 

[JLZ]

People don’t always react normally when confronted with things

If that's your position, why hypothesize a custody dispute at all? Say she killed them because people do weird things and it was a weird thing to do.

 

[Salah11]

If that's your position, why hypothesize a custody dispute at all? Say she killed them because people do weird things and it was a weird thing to do.

Because why would she lie and say the kids were at the movies when they were at home? Seems like that could be a clue imo

 

[JLZ]

Articles keep referring to this "dysfunctional family". And a past article that I paraphrased said that the Baptist church members said Simon's parents wouldn't be happy about a reconciliation.

What if Simon has been to Social Services .... "she tried to poison me, I have lived there to protect my children, I want to get me and the children out of there"?

Maybe the pastor and his family wanted to talk her into letting the children go, and not go to Family Court.

(Just a hypothetical, because we don't really know what was going on in the family. I don't have a personal position about it.)

Are you thinking they're threatening Erin with revealing her attempt to poison Simon?

I've run out of words for the day . . . been trying to reply for nearly an hour . . . I just can't see it that way at all.

 

[JLZ]

Because why would she lie and say the kids were at the movies when they were at home? Seems like that could be a clue imo

She can't seem to decide whether kids ate the same as the guests or not.

They were there . . . oh but they ate a different meal . . . no they weren't there they went to the cinema . . . but they ate the beef wellington later . . . I scraped off the mushrooms so it wasn't the same.

 

[Charlot123]

New paywalled article. (paraphrased)

An officer said that proving intent to kill is what will make this a long investigation.
The Herald Sun understands that Simon almost dying from a gut illness last year was a major consideration in the police interest in the three deaths.
A former homicide investigator said that police will be forensically picking through EP's statement to discredit or validate everything.
The police will be looking through social media, internet searches, and location - looking for planning and potential motive.

Police have not changed their position that the children were at the house, not at the movies.

Intent to harm will be key element of probe into Leongatha mushroom meal deaths

I wonder if EP says “half truth”, which could be later explained? “At the movies” could be “sitting in the basement, at home movie theater, watching the movies”. So if no one doubts, they are at the local cinema. But if checked seriously, “home, watching the movies”.

Likewise, she might have bought something in the Asian store, but not mushrooms at all. In our local Asian chain store, one can buy food, household items, cleaning products, makeup, even glassware. For all I know, she could have bought a wasp killer.

The beauty of buying some “Chinese herbal remedy” is that you have no clue what’s there. Years ago, before I visited dad, I’d go to a local Chinatown store and buy something for dad’s neighbor. Some Chinese remedy against alopecia, and he claimed that was the only one that ever worked. In hindsight, I’d think, it was finasteride, since it worked. But, in a different bottle, with Chinese hieroglyphs, it looked mysterious.

So Erin could have well bought something in her grocery store, but not mushrooms. In a package with Chinese letters, who can tell what it says, and she can later claim, it was a mistake. If I were LE, I’d check what types of rat poison local Asian grocery stores might sell, for example. Or herbicides, or something along the same line. Because I wonder if this is what she bought, and told half-truth.

 

[SouthAussie]

Are you thinking they're threatening Erin with revealing her attempt to poison Simon?

I've run out of words for the day . . . been trying to reply for nearly an hour . . . I just can't see it that way at all.

EP was quick to say that Simon asked her if the dehydrator was what she used to poison them, so she threw it away in a panic because she didn't want to lose her kids.

Makes me think that there may be something going on about her "poisoning Simon" and she made sure that she was first to mention it.

I think most people might tell their ex to get stuffed if they said such a thing to them. Not run and throw away the dehydrator. And be (apparently) scared that they would lose the kids.

 

[JLZ]

EP was quick to say that Simon asked her if the dehydrator was what she used to poison them, so she threw it away in a panic because she didn't want to lose her kids.

Makes me think that there may be something going on about her "poisoning Simon" and she made sure that she was first to mention it.

I think most people might tell their ex to get stuffed if they said such a thing to them. Not run and throw away the dehydrator. And be (apparently) scared that they would lose the kids.

The Under Investigation panellists seemed confident that the pair were up for reconciling if not for his parents. They don't sound like they should be married do they?

If someone accused you of poisoning people, would you think, I could lose custody, or, I could be locked up for attempted murder?

 

[SouthAussie]

The Under Investigation panellists seemed confident that the pair were up for reconciling if not for his parents. They don't sound like they should be married do they?

If someone accused you of poisoning people, would you think, I could lose custody, or, I could be locked up for attempted murder?

I think EP might have felt backed into a corner. Pastor Ian seems like a "powerful" person in town. His parishioners know his stance.

I am not seeing how the lunch guests were all poisoned with Death Cap toxin by the sources that she has claimed for her mushrooms.

If this is absolutely verified Death Cap toxin (presumably it is, because it is a unique heat-resistant toxin) I can only see that it was placed in the meal maliciously.

 

[jepop]

Are you thinking they're threatening Erin with revealing her attempt to poison Simon?

I've run out of words for the day . . . been trying to reply for nearly an hour . . . I just can't see it that way at all.

Yes, that would be strange to say the least if the speculation is that the lunch was to talk over Simon's (speculated) concerns re being poisoned and kid's safety...and then they ate a lunch prepared by her. Moo

 

[JLZ]

Yes, that would be strange to say the least if the speculation is that the lunch was to talk over Simon's (speculated) concerns re being poisoned and kid's safety...and then they ate a lunch prepared by her. Moo

Not just that but the whole scenario of pastor and family wanting Erin to give way on custody but not get a new agreement to that effect certified by the Family Court. Or what in the scenario makes the family eligible to be murdered by Erin; what makes their opinion count as more than annoying.