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

[JLZ]

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

Yes, I'll consider that.

 

[jjleroche]

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.

Regarding the last sentence of your post, I agree that "most people might tell their ex to get stuffed....lose the kids" if they were quite confident, with a healthy level of self-esteem (MOO).

IMO though, EP does not appear to be a particularly confident person, and (again MOO) may be lacking in self-esteem and/or feel powerless in relation to SP(JMO.)

 

[jjleroche]

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.

IIRC, I read something stating that Police still consider EP to be a "Person of Interest" - not a "Suspect". IMO this makes sense, if there are no positive toxicology results yet (ie verification that the victims ingested death cap mushrooms).
Until it can be confirmed that the cause of poisoning was something in the meal which EP served (mushrooms or something else), I don't see how she could officially be considered a "suspect".(JMO)

 

[sapphire blue]

True, not every person reads/watches/listens to everything published or broadcast in any part of the world, but those two examples show that public advice is given in VIC.



Sure, it's up to individual newspaper publishers and editors to decide what they'll publish in their own papers. It would make sense for papers in areas where toxic mushrooms typically grow to publish such warnings periodically.

Again, whether people notice (and take heed of) such warnings is an individual matter.

the 4 suburbs that paper covers are built up inner city suburban areas, not exactly foraging areas.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

All the news articles I've read say that EP remains a suspect.

Mushroom mystery: family lunch leaves Australian town reeling after three deaths in suspected poisoning

As police investigate what looks like a fatal case of food poisoning in Leongatha in rural Victoria, locals recall the victims as kind and community-spirited

www.theguardian.com

Police say Patterson remains a suspect in the investigation because she had prepared the meal.

 

[jjenny]

In US, police now seems to be calling almost everyone suspected of a crime a person of interest instead of a suspect.

 

[jjenny]

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

I don't think his relatives believed his concern that he was poisoned (if indeed he ever told them his suspicions). When he was released from the hospital after his mysterious illness, I believe his wife took care of him when he recovered. I can't imagine it happening if relatives believed she poisoned him.

 

[JBowie]

the 4 suburbs that paper covers are built up inner city suburban areas, not exactly foraging areas.

I guess that's matter for the publisher/editor. However, anyone who read the article would have been informed.

 

[jepop]

I don't think his relatives believed his concern that he was poisoned (if indeed he ever told them his suspicions). When he was released from the hospital after his mysterious illness, I believe his wife took care of him when he recovered. I can't imagine it happening if relatives believed she poisoned him.

My current take is that he had no suspicions re his own illness until his relatives ended up in hospital after lunching at EPs. I believe he's communicated statements that assert he had suspicions earlier than this to media via a third party. Just speculation and Moo.

 

[Oona]

Is there any consensus about when EP and SP separated?
In SP’s Facebook post during his 2022 stay in hospital with his “gut illness” SP refers to his wife and kids coming to visit him.
Yet it has been stated (by EP?) that she “ reluctantly agreed” to care for him during his recovery. Seems a bit strange to me. Her version is that she decided not to reconcile with him after this period of taking care of him.
Also could his parents not have cared for him if he and EP were separating?

There seems to be a lot of inconsistency about whether things were amicable or acrimonious, whether there was any interest in reconciling the relationship from either party,
whether the children were home or not home during the lunch.
I am also very dubious about Erin ”getting sick too”. If she really ate the same meal as her guests at Saturday lunchtime and didn‘t develop symptoms until late Sunday or Monday she is indeed a unicorn.
More and more I am seeing EP’s versions of the story unreliable.

Leongatha mushroom death suspect Erin Patterson tells her side of the story

Ms Patterson said beef Wellington was the served at the fatal lunch.

www.canberratimes.com.au

 

[TootsieFootsie]

An article was posted here, but it was awhile back.

Anyway it said that in 2020 they were dividing up assets due to their separation.

 

[sapphire blue]

I guess that's matter for the publisher/editor. However, anyone who read the article would have been informed.

when it’s for 4 inner city suburbs with a total population around 30,000 that’s a minuscule amount of the Victorian population which is roughly 6.6 million people.

 

[RickshawFan]

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.

Let’s hope Vic Police leave no stone unturned in this case.

All jmo

But that sentence, “The police have not changed their statement, the children were in the house, not the movies” is odd. It claims a fact from a “no information” place. Has LE come out and added anything at all to their initial statement?

 

[RickshawFan]

Why lie? Very weird.

If they’re at the movies, EP wouldn’t have to explain why they didn’t get ill after the lunch. Explaining why her immediate family didn’t get poisoned at a lunch where everyone else did would be very difficult. So, she’s claiming her kids weren’t there.

However, LE could easily ask the kids, or, better still, find out from EP who chaperoned at the movies, ‘cos young kids would have had to have a chaperone. No chaperone, no movies. EP wouldn’t be able to lie on this point, because LE can easily verify. She’s not going to be able to disentangle from this one if it’s a lie.

 

[Ellery84]

But that sentence, “The police have not changed their statement, the children were in the house, not the movies” is odd. It claims a fact from a “no information” place. Has LE come out and added anything at all to their initial statement?

Right, you’re absolutely correct. VIC Police haven’t come out and made a new public statement to refute Erin’s counter-statement that the children were at the movies.

Unless they’ve told the reporter off-the record, but even in that case, the reporter would not be able to publish that.

All imo

 

[Ellery84]

If they’re at the movies, EP wouldn’t have to explain why they didn’t get ill after the lunch. Explaining why her immediate family didn’t get poisoned at a lunch where everyone else did would be very difficult. So, she’s claiming her kids weren’t there.

However, LE could easily ask the kids, or, better still, find out from EP who chaperoned at the movies, ‘cos young kids would have had to have a chaperone. No chaperone, no movies. EP wouldn’t be able to lie on this point, because LE can easily verify. She’s not going to be able to disentangle from this one if it’s a lie.

I think it would be pretty easy to prove or disprove that the children were at the movies on the day in question.

Tickets would have been purchased, there would have been some sort of CCTV at or on the way to the cinema, and Ian - the surviving relative, if in a “stable” condition, would (presumably) be able to string a sentence together to say that the children were either at the lunch or not at the lunch.

In addition to that, presumably at least one or both of the children would have had a cell phone on them, if even for safety and essential communications with mum/dad, which could be analysed with relation to cell towers to help determine location.

The children are old enough to be interviewed, albeit with an adult present, and perhaps the police could even ask them which movie they saw, and ask the children to re-tell the events of the day and the storyline of the supposed movie.

And @RickshawFan , afaik the children are old enough NOT to require a chaperone in a “safe” small town Cinema.

I recall going with friends to the movies once or twice at that age, in a busy metropolitan area. We caught the train in and back, and it was the done thing to do. Going to the movies with your parent when you’re a teenager is most certainly not the “cool” thing to do.

All jmo

 

[RickshawFan]

LE must have a treasure trove of info we haven’t discussed here, namely communications between the 4 and Simon after they began to feel ill or even right after the lunch, since Simon was originally supposed to be there. They must have given him updates, told him they weren’t well, were heading to the hospital, etc. While relying on Ian’s memory might work out, it might not, but even without that, there must have been electronic communication. Unless the folks used landline?

 

[jjenny]

LE must have a treasure trove of info we haven’t discussed here, namely communications between the 4 and Simon after they began to feel ill or even right after the lunch, since Simon was originally supposed to be there. They must have given him updates, told him they weren’t well, were heading to the hospital, etc. While relying on Ian’s memory might work out, it might not, but even without that, there must have been electronic communication. Unless the folks used landline?

Agreed. Simon should have a lot of information on the situation. The children can also be a good source of information. Simon could give permission for them to be interviewed.

 

[MsMarple]

If they’re at the movies, EP wouldn’t have to explain why they didn’t get ill after the lunch. Explaining why her immediate family didn’t get poisoned at a lunch where everyone else did would be very difficult. So, she’s claiming her kids weren’t there.

However, LE could easily ask the kids, or, better still, find out from EP who chaperoned at the movies, ‘cos young kids would have had to have a chaperone. No chaperone, no movies. EP wouldn’t be able to lie on this point, because LE can easily verify. She’s not going to be able to disentangle from this one if it’s a lie.

Maybe it’s a half lie, meaning maybe the kids were home but didn’t eat with the family and left for the movies during the lunch or soon after. Controlling the narrative.

Liars often seem to have a talent for lies by omission and/or half lies. That enables them to backtrack and muddy up the truth.
MOO

 

[JBowie]

when it’s for 4 inner city suburbs with a total population around 30,000 that’s a minuscule amount of the Victorian population which is roughly 6.6 million people.

I quoted that paper as just one example of where the information has been published in VIC.

Again (and finally from me) the VIC government publishes the warnings about toxic mushrooms periodically. It is available for media in various regions of VIC to publish or not at their discretion.

One hopes that media in areas where toxic mushrooms are prevalent would choose to republish those warnings.