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

[CityKid]

I don't accept that it's clear that she has a fear of losing her children, or that she has any reason (other than possibly being a murderer) to fear that she might lose them. I think she's quite clever at implying that she's the victim in a range of situations.

I may be reading too much into her explanation of plating the food and having each guest choose their own, but IMO this fits in with your victim-mentality mention. "The guests picked their own plates; I didn't "give" them poisoned food."

 

[Baby baby Jane]

I understand why people are wondering if the four guests ate or drank elsewhere that day, but who else would stand to gain from poisoning these four particular people?

Does the timeline for symptoms appearing absolutely only fit in with the day of the meal EP served, or is there a window where they could have ingested it a day or even two days before?

Moo - I swing from feeling she is innocent, this is a terrible accident not of her doing, and has handled the press attention very badly thus making herself look guilty, to the other extreme where she is a twisted psychopath who cold heartedly planned and prepared a poisoned ‘last supper’ and watched them eat every morsel knowing she’d never have to see or hear from them again. There is no in-between for me.

IMO - following on from Twiddle, can also see her thinking she will make them very ill, but not die. Maybe weaken them so they no longer influential in her life, they have less power and she can feel as tho she has more. Or just a bit of spiteful revenge. Perhaps she underestimated the potency and did not intend the deaths, just very bad illness that would NOT be associated with her lovely meal. Maybe thought, just 1 DC, or 1/2 DC, among 4-5 people would not be deadly …. Or, if Ex attended might be the little bit that ends him because of his previous illness and it looks like a relapse.
IMO Maybe didn’t intend murder, but intended something.

 

[jepop]

It might depend when he said it. If it was before he realized it was anything more than gastro? Then he could have been joking.

If it was after his parents died he might have said it in the bitter paranoia of early grief (drawing on my own experience). But that doesn't fit with investigators finding the dehydrator on Friday 4th August. At least, it does, if Erin is lying about him saying it before she dumped it.

Just personally, I can't imagine him saying the thing at all after he knew their lives were threatened but before they died.

RBBM: Me too. Which makes me wonder about him if he actually did say it in the context outlined in EPs statement. That context is quite vague though Imo, but she does seem to be saying the conversation occurred early in the week before the victims died (maybe Mon 31st July or Tues 1st Aug?) Moo. I wonder if the convo occurred in front of others (such as the kids). The police will be attempting to check the veracity of EP's statement (as crime analysts have pointed out) Imo.

 

[SMK777]

There are a few too many coincidences for me. SP's previous hospitalisation, the kid's absence, the dumping of the dehydrator - I would need to be very sure of alternate explanations for those things before I decided that EP had no part in these horrific deaths.

That’s exactly what law enforcement has said, also.

 

[jepop]

“The friend”. Again.
If all this is true, why would the children be home? According to LE they were.

Not sure how vocal the 'friend' or 'Simon's friend' has been lately. The article referenced in OP's post is old news - from August 12th.

 

[jepop]

Isn't it possible that she was an odd duck and foraged mushrooms and threw the dehydrator away in a panic because she thought maybe some batch of mushrooms might have been devils cap and now she's just accidentally killed her in laws and her ex hates her and they all think she's a weirdo already, so they'll think she did it on purpose?

I thinks that's possible yes. It's not impossible. Just hard to a take a punt at probability -less or more - with so little to go on in terms of back-ground and evidence. Imo police will look at all angles and end up narrowing down eventually. Jmo

 

[kittythehare]

I understand why people are wondering if the four guests ate or drank elsewhere that day, but who else would stand to gain from poisoning these four particular people?

Does the timeline for symptoms appearing absolutely only fit in with the day of the meal EP served, or is there a window where they could have ingested it a day or even two days before?

Moo - I swing from feeling she is innocent, this is a terrible accident not of her doing, and has handled the press attention very badly thus making herself look guilty, to the other extreme where she is a twisted psychopath who cold heartedly planned and prepared a poisoned ‘last supper’ and watched them eat every morsel knowing she’d never have to see or hear from them again. There is no in-between for me.

Why do you believe she stood to gain from their deaths?

 

[kittythehare]

Not sure how vocal the 'friend' or 'Simon's friend' has been lately. The article referenced in OP's post is old It

Link in article tracks back to infamous Daily Mail article.

 

[Countem]

Why do you believe she stood to gain from their deaths?

MOO. I am not the OP, and this is just supposition based on what we know so far, though she is presumed innocent until proven otherwise:

She stood to gain credibility. If she were to invite her husband alone to a meal that left him poisoned, his poisoning would appear targeted. However, if she were to invite a group to a meal that left the whole group poisoned, their poisoning would appear to be a terrible mistake and any motive against one specific individual would be masked.

Obviously, one would have to be extremely callous to opt to harm multiple people in order to harm one individual, but if the group is already sympathetic to the intended target, it may “sting” less. (Though ultimately only harming the collateral targets when the intended target did not arrive for the meal would be a blow.)

 

[kittythehare]

MOO. I am not the OP, and this is just supposition based on what we know so far, though she is presumed innocent until proven otherwise:

She stood to gain credibility. If she were to invite her husband alone to a meal that left him poisoned, his poisoning would appear targeted. However, if she were to invite a group to a meal that left the whole group poisoned, their poisoning would appear to be a terrible mistake and any motive against one specific individual would be masked.

Obviously, one would have to be extremely callous to opt to harm multiple people in order to harm one individual, but if the group is already sympathetic to the intended target, it may “sting” less. (Though ultimately only harming the collateral targets when the intended target did not arrive for the meal would be a blow.)

She was aware he would not be attending/
Depending upon which of the media sources you trust, that notice was given to her either quite some time before or immediately before if the invisible friend is to be believed.
Either way, she would have noticed he was not there.
prior to serving the meal.

 

[RickshawFan]

I guess it's each to their own. 11 or 12 is old enough to go to the movies IMO (I did)

How did you get there?

So, my question, if no chaperone, who transported the kids to the movies? It’s not gonna be someone in the last stages of cooking a beef wellington IMO.

 

[ch_13]

If the object was to discuss the situation re the marriage, I can see the four inlaws spending some time together by themselves to talk over their opinions re EP.

If so I can see a cup of coffee or tea being offered. Either a call in to a nearby cafe or at one of their homes.

Yes they already ate, but most people over a discussion would still have something to drink.

If they were poisoned at a cafe I would think there would be other victims as well, not just these four. Plus, I'm sure the authorities would shut down the cafe if there was any possibility it was a source so they could go through the kitchen with a fine-tooth comb, interview employees, visit suppliers and so forth. Which would undoubtedly have come out in the press.

As for being poisoned in one of the other homes, that could be possible if they actually did meet up elsewhere. Although there's not been the slightest whisper that they did so. The big question however would be, "Why was EP complaining of stomach pains and diarrhea if she wasn't present at the other home"? It would be (yet another) awfully big coincidence if Erin just happened to get food poisoning from a different source at the very same time.

 

[RickshawFan]

I haven’t seen that yet, can you link the article? Thanks.

ETA: Never mind, I found it.

Speaking to the Australian, she denied she had leaked the statement, saying she had no idea how it got out.

Leongatha suspected mushroom poisoning: Erin Patterson says media has portrayed her as an ‘evil witch’

Woman at centre of Victoria mushroom lunch that left three dead says she feels trapped in her home because reporters are camped outside

www.theguardian.com

"I am now wanting to clear up the record because I have become extremely stressed and overwhelmed by the deaths of my loved ones," Ms Patterson said.

"I am hoping this statement might help in some way. I believe if people understood the background more, they would not be so quick to rush to judgement.

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

Maybe that’s why I assumed she and her lawyer leaked the statement; it’s a little misleading that she says she hopes her statement will help people understand the background. It would be unusual for LE to discuss it with the media.

When she talks, she speaks written language. This is a good example: “I have become extremely stressed and overwhelmed by the deaths of my loved ones.” IMO she wrote this, and practiced in front of a mirror, but it sticks out because people don’t naturally speak this way, except maybe LE’s phrasing when reading a statement.

Also, she is all I I I I I I. No concern for how others are doing.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

If I was innocent of murder, and was badgered, and harassed by a out for blood media it's very likely that I would try to defend myself, just like she has.

So yes it would be I I I I I!

That would be a perfectly normal way to react.

Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't.

 

[jepop]

When she talks, she speaks written language. This is a good example: “I have become extremely stressed and overwhelmed by the deaths of my loved ones.” IMO she wrote this, and practiced in front of a mirror, but it sticks out because people don’t naturally speak this way, except maybe LE’s phrasing when reading a statement.

Also, she is all I I I I I I. No concern for how others are doing.

The article is quoting from a written statement she sent to police, that's why it sounds as if it was written.

 

[jjenny]

If I was innocent of murder, and was badgered, and harassed by a out for blood media it's very likely that I would try to defend myself, just like she has.

So yes it would be I I I I I!

That would be a perfectly normal way to react.

Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't.

I don't recommend lying to the police.

 

[ch_13]

She was aware he would not be attending/
Depending upon which of the media sources you trust, that notice was given to her either quite some time before or immediately before if the invisible friend is to be believed.
Either way, she would have noticed he was not there.
prior to serving the meal.

I've been wondering if Erin poisoned the dishes because she knew Simon wasn't coming. Especially in light of some media reports that Simon's parents weren't happy at any talk of reconciliation.

This is purely supposition on my part without any evidence whatsoever. But if so, she certainly wouldn't be the first person who was unhappy with the meddling of their partner's family and who thought that a relationship would be better if the in-laws just weren't around anymore.

 

[jjenny]

Media reports have been contradictory on who if anybody wanted a reconciliation.

 

[Forest_Wood]

I am new to mushroom foraging and I'm reading this book called How To Forage of Mushrooms Without Dying. Here's a little excerpt from it. If this was actually a case of her foraging for her own mushrooms, even experts can make mistakes apparently.

 

[Tweet57]

Media reports have been contradictory on who if anybody wanted a reconciliation.

I can’t see any parents trying to influence a reconciliation, in light of an unhappy marriage breakdown. I think most parents would respect the situation, despite their possible disappointment. SP and EP are grown adults and would make their own decision, not just reconciling because of the parent’s view. Parents just want their kids to be happy. I think if SP and EP could have moved forward being amicable for their children‘s sake, the parents would‘ve accepted it. A reconciliation certainly won’t be happening now.IMO