I'm really late to this macabre dinner party, but do we have any sense of the actual evidence against her? Internet searches, purchases?
History is obviously going to be a factor here.
JMO
If you just look at the big picture, it seems very suspicious.
She is going through an upcoming divorce after a long separation. She has to square away a few legal issues with her ex----
One being the legal custody arrangements of their 2 children.
And the other being the potential division of properties as she owns a few homes. She received an inheritance but it will still have to be sorted out which is hers and which is community property.
Her in-laws were coming to her home to mediate and negotiate some of the divorce issues with her. Her ex decided at the last minute not to attend the lunch meeting. So some might think the toxins were originally intended for him, as the Beef Wellington would have been prepared before he cancelled his visit.
She and her 4 victims were very different in terms of their beliefs. She was a proud atheist and thought that religious people were not very intelligent. Her victims were devoutly religious and probably wanted to convince her to allow the children to spend more time with them. And their father, probably.
There is often a lot of deep seated anger and resentment from a divorce. We don't know if there was in this case or not. But there could have been. Especially because her ex immediately accused her of killing his family and also accused her of poisoning him previously.
So it does seem to set up some possible motives because of the divorce situation.
The other suspicious factor is that there were 8 potential victims of the death cap meal----and only 4 of them were deathly ill
The cook, her 2 children and the family dog escaped any dire results. But her 4 guests were not so lucky. That is pretty suspicious right there. And her excuses make no sense.
She said that she fed her kids some of the beef wellington but she scraped the mushrooms off first. THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE---all reports have said that even if you took off the mushrooms, the rest of the meal would be highly toxic because it pervades all of the meal during cooking.
So that seems to be untrue, as her kids would have been very ill if not dead if it was a true statement. And I also believe she would have fed her big beautiful Labrador some beef scrapings from the meal. Unless of course she knew it was tainted.
So IMO< she had some possible motives because of the pending divorce.
And it was suspicious that the only victims from the cooked meal were her guests, who were siding with her ex-husband.
But some of the most suspicious things were the way she acted afterwards and her statements. Her videos remind me of people like Chris Watts, where you watch their initial statements about their missing spouse and you immediately have hair standing up on back of your neck.
And then the later statement, awkwardly released by her attorney, where she gives a weird explanation of how she acquired the mushrooms she used, and why she lied to police about when and why she tossed out the dehydrator. Big red flags there.
When you just look at the big picture, lots of red flags waving all around, IMO. I don't know what evidence they have at this point, in terms of autopsies, test results, interviews, call logs, computers, etc.
www.smh.com.au
