Evidence of Intent and/or Motive?
posted* by
@ch_13
"... Let's say—just hypothetically—that the forensic evidence showed that the four victims ingested death cap mushrooms and that those spores were present in the meal that EP served. In that case, the prosecution could introduce the following points of evidence:
1. EP hid evidence by dumping the dehydrator (assuming it was used in the meal prep).
2. She lied to police on two separate occasions and claimed that she only used store-bought mushrooms. Certainly there'd be testimony from mushroom growers, retailers etc. stating that DC mushrooms would never end up for sale in a market.
3. She herself was unscathed by any sickness even though she partook in the meal. Experts may likely have some idea of how she was able to avoid the toxin.
4. Presumably, Simon or others could testify as to motive. Whether that was because of disputes over child custody, or she intended to harm her ex, or some other reason.
5. Perhaps others might testify that she was an expert mushroom forager, as has been reported in the press.
To me that seems sufficient evidence for a jury to infer her intent, although I'll admit I'm not familiar with the standards in Australian courts."
===============================================
snipped by me
@ch_13 Some interesting points and collectively they do not reflect well on EP. But from angle of a barrister defending her (which I am not) ---
1 and 2. If true, discarding a dehydrator which may be potential evidence of crime & lying to LE are not (strong) evidence of EP's state of mind as to either intent or motive BEFORE these deaths. They may be evd of her covering up actions AFTER the fact but do not necessarily substantiate either motive or intent, i.e., defendant's State of Mind Before-The-Fact.
Think of an inattentive driver who injures or kills a pedestrian inadvertently, then drives away. No motive & no intent before the injury or death, but takes steps afterward to evade LE.
Mushrooms from where? As witnesses, mushrooms growers & vendors may be permitted to describe procedures they follow to assure safe mushroom products in the mkt place, but doubtful imo that any would be permitted to state that DC mushrooms could "never end up for sale in a market" in OZ. If they did testify “Never,” def. could cross exam, about possibilities of bogus-product-substitution (switch out DC mushrooms for ordinary edible ones) by disgruntled retail employee or customer, or a rando pulling a potentially lethal TV “Jackass” type stunt. Stuff happens. Remember the mysterious source of Needles in Australian Strawberries?**
3. EP was "unscathed" by illness. Well, she did receive med treatment at a hosp, tho apparently not for a life threatening condition. And yes, her descriptions of symptoms to med. personel there may have been big fat lies. But without stmts of others to whom she may have admitted telling BFL's, her escaping coma or death does not necessarily indicate intent to poison to injure or kill others.
4. Child custody disputes could loom large as a motive to harm SP, perhaps even permanently eliminate need to interact w him. But poisoning to injure or kill his parents, relatives in order to harm SP? Okay, remotely possible. Remotely.
5. EP as an expert forager. Has this person, ready to testify, actually witnessed EP frequently, routinely identifying & picking only "safe" mushrooms? And specifically seen EP bypassing DC mushrooms, and identifying them as such to this person? If so, that would be meaningful evd of EP’s mushroom picking skills. More weighty than someone saying, I saw a stack of mushroom books at EP’s house (<--- my paraphrasing from as MSM article. Sorry no link). More significant than ten yrs ago we went mushroom hunting, then cooked & ate what we picked. Since neither of us ended up sick, she must be an expert (<---which I just concocted as a stmt someone describing EP as a mushroom expert might have said (flimsy hypo testimony)
Yes, prosecutor could intro evd. on some or all the above points, but seems imo there’s room for Def. to do some damaging cross exam and closing argument to raise ReasDoubt. Of course, that’s on INTENT, one element of a murder offense the prosecutor must prove. Evidence of MOTIVE is icing on the cake.
Personally speaking numerous factors re EP’s actions & stmts ring my hinky meter, but drawing no conclusions based on the limited info known to be factual.
________________________
*
Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #3
** One example: "On November 23, 2012, Matt-Dillion Shannon, an 18-year-old from Napier, New Zealand, was sentenced to three years in prison on a charge of causing grievous bodily harm for his role in the August 2011 dousing of a 16-year-old with gasoline and setting him on fire. Shannon's lawyer claimed that this act was inspired by the Jackass series, despite the fact that no such stunt ever aired, nor was ever attempted, on the show.[16]"
"Teen found guilty over setting friend on fire". Stuff. September 12, 2012.
en.wikipedia.org
Needles in Strawberries, 2018. A strawberry farm supervisor was accused of placing sewing needles found inside strawberries in stores, she was charged with food contamination offences.
en.wikipedia.org
www.dailymail.co.uk
thefarmermagazine.com.au
