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

[FluffyDove]

Does anybody have any information about the inheritance laws there? Let's say there is no will, what is the legal succession of assets? If a couple dies, and one of them has a sister and this couple also has a son, would the deceased person's sister also have a right to inheritance? And if so, would the son not passing away before or at the same time affect this sister's inheritance? If it does, it could be a reason to include the mother-in-law's sister and her husband, if guilty, jmo.

 

[d0lphin]

That's the biggest red flag IMO...

And disposing of the dehydrator.

 

[Kemug]

When I was growing up a million years ago, the only mushrooms that were consumed were store bought. There was no such thing has "mushroom hunting". We were told that all wild mushrooms were considered poisonous. Fast forward 55 years...I still don't know how to tell one mushroom apart from the other. That is because unlike plants, they have very different appearances during phases of their growth. About the only mushrooms I would recognize would be a "stinkhorn".(LOL, but even then I don't know if it would have it's unique phallic shape in all phases of growth) and ganoderma (conks).


When I was a master gardener, we would get calls about mushrooms and were told to refer them to the local mycology society. It's that tricky of a subject.

There are so many weird-looking mushrooms in the shops today, but I still stick to the "proper mushrooms" of my youth. (No-one has ever accused me of being an adventurous eater!)

 

[TootsieFootsie]

There are so many weird-looking mushrooms in the shops today, but I still stick to the "proper mushrooms" of my youth. (No-one has ever accused me of being an adventurous eater!)

I'm with you.

Some of those other mushrooms look like they should be poisonous.

 

[JLZ]

Does anybody have any information about the inheritance laws there? Let's say there is no will, what is the legal succession of assets? If a couple dies, and one of them has a sister and this couple also has a son, would the deceased person's sister also have a right to inheritance? And if so, would the son not passing away before or at the same time affect this sister's inheritance? If it does, it could be a reason to include the mother-in-law's sister and her husband, if guilty, jmo.

Not a lawyer, but I believe a child would take precedence over a sister. Also, it's thought to be expensive to die intestate, so there might not be anything left after expenses.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Ah the ex had a lucky escape again.
So she didnt change the menu when he didnt arrive.
At least he will be able to tell police if he had eaten the mushrooms before.

When I was growing up a million years ago, the only mushrooms that were consumed were store bought. There was no such thing has "mushroom hunting". We were told that all wild mushrooms were considered poisonous. Fast forward 55 years...I still don't know how to tell one mushroom apart from the other. That is because unlike plants, they have very different appearances during phases of their growth. About the only mushrooms I would recognize would be a "stinkhorn".(LOL, but even then I don't know if it would have it's unique phallic shape in all phases of growth) and ganoderma (conks).


When I was a master gardener, we would get calls about mushrooms and were told to refer them to the local mycology society. It's that tricky of a subject.

I’ve picked mushrooms and eaten them for years until this, but I’m put off .. I didn’t realise how risky it really was.

 

[Estelle]

I'm not a lawyer but I have a legal mind. I also have a background in psychology but I'm retired now. So I always look for possible motives especially at the beginning of a case.

Basically the main motives are love, lust, loathing, or loot. But this author lists 15 motives for murder. Why Do People Kill? 15 Motives for Murder, BRYN DONOVAN

In this case, I guessed it could be loot and excluded religious differences early.

When I read that this couple are separated, but still amicable, I guessed the divorce might not have reached the legal stage yet so that papers were not signed. So EP, not wanting to lose her lovely house, IMO could have tried to poison her husband first. When that didn't work, she made sure she kept a close relationship with the in laws. I suspect that the mother in law's sister and her husband did not have any children so they were going to leave everything to SP in their will and EP knew that. So if his parents and his parents sister and her husband died, EP would inherit all of his mother's sister's and her husband's estate and one-fourth of his parents' estate as they had four children. If SP had been there, she would have also received the house in her name as well. But as SP wasn't there at the lunch, she went ahead with it and included the auntie and her husband as SP was likely to inherit more money from them assuming they didn't have any children.

EP had to do this before any property settlement was agreed to in writing because she would then have hoped to at least get half of anything SP inherited plus half of anything they owned together and possibly more as she had been a stay at home mother. She would then possibly have had enough money to buy her estranged husband's share of their house.

If this theory is true, then a lot of thought and planning must have gone into this over more than a year and if she is found guilty, then she could be charged with premeditated murder when she thought she had got rid of any evidence and would go scot-free!

All in IMO

 

[boomburger]

Perhaps, if this was intentional, she just didn't want her ex husband and his family in her life any more. Like she wanted to move on from them and chose the most awful way of doing so.

 

[JLZ]

I'm not a lawyer but I have a legal mind. I also have a background in psychology but I'm retired now. So I always look for possible motives especially at the beginning of a case.

Basically the main motives are love, lust, loathing, or loot. But this author lists 15 motives for murder. Why Do People Kill? 15 Motives for Murder, BRYN DONOVAN

In this case, I guessed it could be loot and excluded religious differences early.

When I read that this couple are separated, but still amicable, I guessed the divorce might not have reached the legal stage yet so that papers were not signed. So EP, not wanting to lose her lovely house, IMO could have tried to poison her husband first. When that didn't work, she made sure she kept a close relationship with the in laws. I suspect that the mother in law's sister and her husband did not have any children so they were going to leave everything to SP in their will and EP knew that. So if his parents and his parents sister and her husband died, EP would inherit all of his mother's sister's and her husband's estate and one-fourth of his parents' estate as they had four children. If SP had been there, she would have also received the house in her name as well. But as SP wasn't there at the lunch, she went ahead with it and included the auntie and her husband as SP was likely to inherit more money from them assuming they didn't have any children.

EP had to do this before any property settlement was agreed to in writing because she would then have hoped to at least get half of anything SP inherited plus half of anything they owned together and possibly more as she had been a stay at home mother. She would then possibly have had enough money to buy her estranged husband's share of their house.

If this theory is true, then a lot of thought and planning must have gone into this over more than a year and if she is found guilty, then she could be charged with premeditated murder when she thought she had got rid of any evidence and would go scot-free!

All in IMO

It would be good to know whether after the separation SP made a new will.

 

[ChatteringBirds]

Do you think these are wealthy people? I mean, it's not a wealthy area, though the old houses I believe can be nice.

Wealth is very relative. Any homeowner right now is well-off, IMHO.

I'm still keeping my mind open to all possibilities.

Yes. We forget this sometimes.
However I do not personally think, if there is a guilty party involved, that it was someone who wasn't even there. That theory seems the most unlikely to me.

 

[Estelle]

It would be good to know whether after the separation SP made a new will.

I don't think that would have made any difference as it appears that they would have been married for years if they now have teenage children. Also I don't think she was suspected for causing her estranged husband's hospitalisation. So there was still trust in her from the rest of the family and SP.

The main thing is whether they had already signed a property settlement.

 

[Jess M.]

From what we know 3 people are dead and 2 other close family members have suffered from serious stomach complaints. And yet remarkably she has escaped it all.

That's the biggest red flag IMO...

 

[Jess M.]

I'm still keeping my mind open to all possibilities.

I'm not. IMO foul play is involved. On 7 News tonight it said that the female suspect told police at the weekend that she bought the mushrooms from the local shops and when questioned further, she refused to comment. Guilty!

 

[AliceInPain]

7 news have just said she said initially she bought the mushrooms from the local shops

Supposedly in the first police interview.
If true, we can add "changing her story" to the no-tears crying interview, the dumped food dehydrator, her not getting ill, the ex getting seriously ill last year and him supposed to have been there too...
I guess if they are separated/ divorcing there will possibly be custody issues too? And didn't a friend of his say she wanted the house?

She could be completely innocent, maybe she did pick them and cooked and served them not knowing they were poisonous, and now she's panicking trying to not look suspect - but instead makes herself look even more so? (I believe less and less this or something like it happened with these little "bombshells" dropping every other day. imo.)

 

[JLZ]

Supposedly in the first police interview.
If true, we can add "changing her story" to the no-tears crying interview, the dumped food dehydrator, her not getting ill, the ex getting seriously ill last year and him supposed to have been there too...
I guess if they are separated/ divorcing there will possibly be custody issues too? And didn't a friend of his say she wanted the house?

She could be completely innocent, maybe she did pick them and cooked and served them not knowing they were poisonous, and now she's panicking trying to not look suspect - but instead makes herself look even more so? (I believe less and less this or something like it happened with these little "bombshells" dropping every other day. imo.)

What was the change in story? Did she say she picked the mushrooms another time?

 

[Estelle]

What was the change in story? Did she say she picked the mushrooms another time?

IMO the point is that shops don't sell poisonous mushrooms.

 

[JLZ]

I don't think that would have made any difference as it appears that they would have been married for years if they now have teenage children. Also I don't think she was suspected for causing her estranged husband's hospitalisation. So there was still trust in her from the rest of the family and SP.

The main thing is whether they had already signed a property settlement.

I think I see what you mean. Assuming SP survived? What if he'd joined the lunch, died, and had willed everything to a new partner, or left it in trust for the children until they came of age?

Edit: And about not being suspected for causing her ex's hospitalisation, I don't suspect her of that either, yet. You see with Ian, the result was that he needs a new liver. Now there was no suggestion that SP had any liver damage. He was recurrently close to death, and I am assuming those occasions were connected with whether or not he'd survive surgery. It sounds to me like a completely different thing. But of course I'm holding my breath for the medical records review.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I think there's still a lot we don't know.

Until we know more I'm not going to pronounce someone guilty.

Anyway it's not up to me to judge anyone. That's up to the courts. That's why we have them.

 

[JLZ]

IMO the point is that shops don't sell poisonous mushrooms.

I think 7News made an important point that there had been no product recall.

 

[Lord Peter Flimsy]

At this stage I wouldn’t invite her to take part in MasterChef. If she is guilty it’s the most stupid and unsubtle way of a means to an end. Just a small amount of an ingested Death Cap mushroom will kill you.

The only advantage of using this method is that symptoms don’t show up immediately and symptoms can subside for 1 to 2 days even though the dose was fatal and destroyed your liver.