Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #10 *Arrest*

[katydid23]

Totally agree, these conversations would have contained information about the 4 of them being in hospital.

Let's just for a moment assume innocence - what would an innocent host of a prior lunch do? I'm guessing the lunch would have at that stage already been a likely source of the illness of 4 people who attended it (but apparently they also attended a mutual dinner the night before the lunch). An innocent host would likely not be able to go and visit them in hospital while they are running test? An innocent person would likely be quite proactive in reviewing herself whether the mutual lunch could have caused any symptoms. An innocent person might also just go about her day as usual as she couldn't do anything at that stage? Let's disregard at that moment that the innocent person likely would have suffered similar symptoms to the guests as well if the same meal had been consumed.

But the calls alone and Erin knowing about them being unwell, how do they point to guilt?

But the calls alone and Erin knowing about them being unwell, how do they point to guilt?

I think it is suspicious that she didn't immediately rush her children to the hospital. They ate leftovers, and it could have been the meat that was dangerous.

And even more suspicious is that she fed them those leftovers for dinner, AFTER she already knew the 4 lunch guests were hospitalised and she herself said she felt unwell too.

And knowing they were unwell but then lying about the source of the mushrooms is highly suspicious. IMO

 

[LinasK]

How can she keep things normal for her children if there is a possibility they are going to get sick like their grandparents? I'd think she'd want to take them to the hospital to be examined in case they were victims too, unless she already knew they weren't in any danger.


Besides, EP has told people that she had been unwell in the middle of the night and had explosive diarrhoea. Why then would she put on cream coloured pants and agree to take a 3 hour drive that day? It doesn't make sense if what she said was true. IMO

Or eat a hotdog or sandwich with chili in it or drink coffee. You don't ingest any of those things when you have an upset stomach.

 

[Yh5r]

But the calls alone and Erin knowing about them being unwell, how do they point to guilt?

I think it is suspicious that she didn't immediately rush her children to the hospital. They ate leftovers, and it could have been the meat that was dangerous.

And even more suspicious is that she fed them those leftovers for dinner, AFTER she already knew the 4 lunch guests were hospitalised and she herself said she felt unwell too.

And knowing they were unwell but then lying about the source of the mushrooms is highly suspicious. IMO

I am trying to keep an open mind (which isn't easy with all the lies she's told) but possibly at this stage things didn't point to the lunch yet (as far as I know the 4 lunch guests also shared a dinner the night prior to the lunch). But yes, seeing that Erin said she was unwell overnight, the road trip on the next day and feeding her children the 'left overs' doesn't make sense at all.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

I don't suppose it would have gone down well if Simon had replied "Oh for heavens sake woman! Just lose some weight, and get a bit of exercise!"

DBM

It is there back in my post #76 of this thread.

Here is the link again:

Erin Patterson had a 'collection of mushroom books' at her home

Deadly cook Erin Patterson had a collection of books about mushrooms she kept at her home where three people died, Daily Mail Australia has been told.

www.dailymail.co.uk

So sorry. I just found the reference to books about mushrooms on her bookshelf. If this is true, you would think that the police would have taken them as evidence?

 

[HoneyBunOne]

Apparently, Simon called her around 11:30 am on Sunday morning, the day after the lunch, as he was taking 2 of her lunch guests to the hospital. And he called her again around 2:30. So I have to believe he was telling her that her guests were unwell. I'm sure he'd want to know how she and his kids were doing, and he'd want to be sure his kids were warned against eating any of that food.

But reportedly she still ended up feeding them the leftovers later that day. I think it was important to her that she be able to say "Look, I fed my kids that meal too, it's not poisonous"

What is odd to me is that she chose the day after to give her kids the leftovers. The day she knew ALL her guests were very unwell.

My understanding of the events is that she had the 4 guests over for lunch on the Saturday. That day Simon (presuming it was him) dropped the kids and a friend of the son at a movie theatre where the 3 of them had lunch and then watched a movie. Simon picked the 3 of them up and dropped them all back at Erin's, where the lunch guests still were for a small amount of time before leaving. At some point in the late afternoon/early evening Erin and her son (no mention of the daughter) dropped the friend back home. After the drop off, Erin dropped her son at Subway to buy food, and returned 11 minutes later to get him. Nobody knows where she went and what she did in this time.

What I can't get my head around is why not feed the leftovers to the kids that night? The night before everyone got sick, when nobody knew the beef wellingtons were potentially the cause? And why scrape mushrooms off the individual pies when she did feed them to her kids? She knew how many guests she had, so why put the mushroom in the extra serves? She knew both her kids don't like mushrooms, so why not make at least 2 spares without any? Instead, she waited until she knew ALL 4 of her guests were in hospital, and she herself had allegedly been sick, to feed the leftovers to the kids, and then not even want them checked out in case they were going to get very sick, very soon too.

I'd love to hear her answer as to why she fed them potentially deadly leftovers, knowing all her guests were hospitalised at the time. It would have been so much easier, and just make sense, to give them leftovers the night of the lunch, if she did indeed knowingly put death caps in certain serves. If she didn't knowingly do it, then nobody in their right mind would feed them to their kids, even with the mushroom scraped off.

 

[LinasK]

What is odd to me is that she chose the day after to give her kids the leftovers. The day she knew ALL her guests were very unwell.

My understanding of the events is that she had the 4 guests over for lunch on the Saturday. That day Simon (presuming it was him) dropped the kids and a friend of the son at a movie theatre where the 3 of them had lunch and then watched a movie. Simon picked the 3 of them up and dropped them all back at Erin's, where the lunch guests still were for a small amount of time before leaving. At some point in the late afternoon/early evening Erin and her son (no mention of the daughter) dropped the friend back home. After the drop off, Erin dropped her son at Subway to buy food, and returned 11 minutes later to get him. Nobody knows where she went and what she did in this time.

What I can't get my head around is why not feed the leftovers to the kids that night? The night before everyone got sick, when nobody knew the beef wellingtons were potentially the cause? And why scrape mushrooms off the individual pies when she did feed them to her kids? She knew how many guests she had, so why put the mushroom in the extra serves? She knew both her kids don't like mushrooms, so why not make at least 2 spares without any? Instead, she waited until she knew ALL 4 of her guests were in hospital, and she herself had allegedly been sick, to feed the leftovers to the kids, and then not even want them checked out in case they were going to get very sick, very soon too.

I'd love to hear her answer as to why she fed them potentially deadly leftovers, knowing all her guests were hospitalised at the time. It would have been so much easier, and just make sense, to give them leftovers the night of the lunch, if she did indeed knowingly put death caps in certain serves. If she didn't knowingly do it, then nobody in their right mind would feed them to their kids, even with the mushroom scraped off.

The answer is obvious to me- she gave them portions she knew had no poison in them- like her portion- and also she could claim "See it couldn't have been the Beef Wellington, my kids didn't get sick from it".

 

[Deleted member 363451]

What is odd to me is that she chose the day after to give her kids the leftovers. The day she knew ALL her guests were very unwell.

My understanding of the events is that she had the 4 guests over for lunch on the Saturday. That day Simon (presuming it was him) dropped the kids and a friend of the son at a movie theatre where the 3 of them had lunch and then watched a movie. Simon picked the 3 of them up and dropped them all back at Erin's, where the lunch guests still were for a small amount of time before leaving. At some point in the late afternoon/early evening Erin and her son (no mention of the daughter) dropped the friend back home. After the drop off, Erin dropped her son at Subway to buy food, and returned 11 minutes later to get him. Nobody knows where she went and what she did in this time.

What I can't get my head around is why not feed the leftovers to the kids that night? The night before everyone got sick, when nobody knew the beef wellingtons were potentially the cause? And why scrape mushrooms off the individual pies when she did feed them to her kids? She knew how many guests she had, so why put the mushroom in the extra serves? She knew both her kids don't like mushrooms, so why not make at least 2 spares without any? Instead, she waited until she knew ALL 4 of her guests were in hospital, and she herself had allegedly been sick, to feed the leftovers to the kids, and then not even want them checked out in case they were going to get very sick, very soon too.

I'd love to hear her answer as to why she fed them potentially deadly leftovers, knowing all her guests were hospitalised at the time. It would have been so much easier, and just make sense, to give them leftovers the night of the lunch, if she did indeed knowingly put death caps in certain serves. If she didn't knowingly do it, then nobody in their right mind would feed them to their kids, even with the mushroom scraped off.

To me, this just shows that she only put the death caps in her guests meals.

 

[Scuffy35]

I look at it in a different way.
Not only did she want to try to keep things normal for her children, she also didn't want to disappoint her son.

I don't know if her son would have been too disappointed, according to his video testimony:

“I had a flying lesson that afternoon. I don’t know why mum drove to that, because she said she was feeling sick that morning.”

‘He did things to hurt mum’: Erin Patterson’s son reveals his parents’ disputes

Erin Patterson is accused of killing three people with poisonous death cap mushrooms.

7news.com.au

 

[HoneyBunOne]

Also, for someone who doesn't have much money, they just reported that she spent $82 on a delivered food meal???

Nobody is saying she doesn't have much money AFAIK. She recently has/had investment properties, owned 2 homes, and lent money to at least 2 family members (who were paying the loans back).

$82 for a delivered meal is fairly average. It included 2 adults meals and 2 kids meals, plus delivery costs. Adult meals are probably around $25-$30 each, kids meals about $10-$12, making it normal prices for a take away pub meal. I'm assuming the 2nd adult meal was for Simon.

 

[MrJ]

Proceedings are slow to start today

By Mikaela Ortolan

There's some legal delays to today's evidence getting underway.

We'll be ready to go once the jury's back in, but while we wait, here are a few things we learned yesterday:

1.LSC Eppingstall told the court a SIM card was swapped from one phone to a Nokia mobile phone during a police search of Erin's home in August 2023.
2.Erin told Facebook friends she purchased a new phone when hers was broken and had learnt about doing a "hard reboot".
3.Text messages sent in the weeks before the lunch were shown to the court. In them, Erin told her mother-in-law, Gail Patterson, that she had a needle biopsy taken of a lump and needed an MRI. LSC Eppingstall says his investigation found no evidence of either of these happening.
4.Erin's purchase history and Woolworths Rewards card showed in the week before the lunch there had been purchases of mushroom slices, puff pastry, frozen filo pastry among other items from the supermarket giant.
5.During cross-examination the defence introduced earlier medical records from 2021 where Erin raised concerns about ovarian cancer and the initial results, according to medical notes, were "all fine".

Defence cross-examines police witness in Erin Patterson trial — as it happened

Erin Patterson is accused of murdering three of her relatives by serving them a beef Wellington lunch which contained death cap mushrooms. Follow the trial live.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Yh5r]

Nobody is saying she doesn't have much money AFAIK. She recently has/had investment properties, owned 2 homes, and lent money to at least 2 family members (who were paying the loans back).

$82 for a delivered meal is fairly average. It included 2 adults meals and 2 kids meals, plus delivery costs. Adult meals are probably around $25-$30 each, kids meals about $10-$12, making it normal prices for a take away pub meal. I'm assuming the 2nd adult meal was for Simon.

I don't find it overly expensive either, just normal prices for take away.

She seems to make money a big topic (backlash from her about Simon ticking "separated" on his tax return which meant a loss of Family Tax Benefit to her, the "fortune" she spent on the ingredients for the Beef Wellington, complaining about the $400 for a phone) but she had multiple properties in her name so can't be doing that badly IMO.

 

[HoneyBunOne]

The answer is obvious to me- she gave them portions she knew had no poison in them- like her portion- and also she could claim "See it couldn't have been the Beef Wellington, my kids didn't get sick from it".

Same, it's obvious to me too (in my opinion), but from an outsiders perspective it makes zero sense to feed it to them when it could make them very, very ill. It begs the question why, and so far, I don't believe it's been asked.

 

[Eloise]

It boggles the mind that the accused went to such lengths to obstruct the investigation by hiding the contents of her phone. And then to lie about the source of the mushrooms, thus delaying a clear diagnosis.

It’s hard to ignore the probability that her actions were intentional, designed to prevent her guests from receiving treatment for as long as possible. IOW to ensure they’d die.

And much of her previous medical history is self reported with no evidence to support at least some of her claims. Smoke and mirrors blown into the faces of the jury IMO.

How much of the accused’s fairy tales will the jury believe? Hard to tell. She once allegedly wrote about the local community, calling them “illiterate <bad word>’s.”

Mushroom chef's Facebook messages leak

Mushroom chef Erin Patterson lashed out at her local community while putting together the local newspaper, an insider has revealed.

www.dailymail.co.uk

from what I can gather even the most generous reading of the situation is that after a genuinely accidental poisoning (not something that generally results in charges anyway) she prioritized her own embarrassment/panic/fear of consequences over the health and lives of her guests.

Nobody is saying she doesn't have much money AFAIK. She recently has/had investment properties, owned 2 homes, and lent money to at least 2 family members (who were paying the loans back).

$82 for a delivered meal is fairly average. It included 2 adults meals and 2 kids meals, plus delivery costs. Adult meals are probably around $25-$30 each, kids meals about $10-$12, making it normal prices for a take away pub meal. I'm assuming the 2nd adult meal was for Simon.

For any Americans reading I think that $82 would seem pretty high but that wouldn't be weird at all in Australia for delivery of two adults and two kids pub meals. Just fyi to Americans following along, our minimum wage is nearly $25/hr. Just to put it into perspective. (Also exchange rate: $82 AUD is currently about $52 USD and it would have been roughly similar-ish at the time)

 

[HoneyBunOne]

I don't find it overly expensive either, just normal prices for take away.

She seems to make money a big topic (backlash from her about Simon ticking "separated" on his tax return which meant a loss of Family Tax Benefit to her, the "fortune" she spent on the ingredients for the Beef Wellington, complaining about the $400 for a phone) but she had multiple properties in her name so can't be doing that badly IMO.

Yes, I meant to add that despite not being poor, she seemed to make money an issue. Maybe she was just tight, maybe she grew up poor, maybe she was greedy, but money seemed to be a focal point in a lot of her dramas and life choices.

 

[LinasK]

from what I can gather even the most generous reading of the situation is that after a genuinely accidental poisoning (not something that generally results in charges anyway) she prioritized her own embarrassment/panic/fear of consequences over the health and lives of her guests.



For any Americans reading I think that $82 would seem pretty high but that wouldn't be weird at all in Australia for delivery of two adults and two kids pub meals. Just fyi to Americans following along, our minimum wage is nearly $25/hr. Just to put it into perspective. (Also exchange rate: $82 AUD is currently about $52 USD)

Okay thanks, yes I'm in the US, and even with delivery fees, I can't fathom paying $82 for a delivered meal.

 

[LinasK]

Yes, I meant to add that despite not being poor, she seemed to make money an issue. Maybe she was just tight, maybe she grew up poor, maybe she was greedy, but money seemed to be a focal point in a lot of her dramas and life choices.

That's what I was getting at. She's claiming to be poor yet willing to spend so much on delivery food.

 

[katydid23]

If that is true, I think that is a terrible error by the prosecution.

So far there has been no evidence to support the knowledge of mushrooms and her experience in foraging. It would go to disproving the main defence that it was just a terrible mistake.

This could make all the difference in convincing the Jury for a murder conviction.

Why would the prosecution be keen to condense and shorten the trial anyway.? A better way would be to not have so many late starts, early finishes and days or afternoons off.

But if Simon had told the he had no knowledge of her being a forager of mushrooms than that friend's testimony would be less believable.

And I don't think they need that much evidence that she was an experienced forager because the state's case is that she intentionally hunted down Death Caps. She wasn't going looking for safe mushrooms if she was going specifically to the locations that DC's were sighted.

And her actions don't make sense if they were considered by her to be safe freshly picked mushrooms. Why didn't she eat any of them when they were freshly picked? She dried them and powdered them. Why go to the trouble to go foraging for fresh delicious mushrooms just to turn them into powder? It doesn't make sense.

If she thought they were safe mushrooms, why were the only victims of that meal the guests? Why didn't she and the kids and the dog get sick? Just scraping the mushrooms off would not have prevented the kids from getting seriously ill. And EP ate the same amount of the meal as Gail did.

I don't think the D's case that it was an innocent accident holds much water. Too many pieces of evidence going against that for me.

 

[katydid23]

If that is true, I think that is a terrible error by the prosecution.

So far there has been no evidence to support the knowledge of mushrooms and her experience in foraging. It would go to disproving the main defence that it was just a terrible mistake.

If she had no experience foraging and she went ahead and picked wild mushrooms and served them to 4 guests, without telling them ---that is criminal negligence, IMO. Especially when she herself doesn't get sick.

This could make all the difference in convincing the Jury for a murder conviction.

Why would the prosecution be keen to condense and shorten the trial anyway.? A better way would be to not have so many late starts, early finishes and days or afternoons off.

True

 

[Shortfusepsb]

Having assets, getting an inheritance, or even having a decent income doesn’t always mean someone’s got their finances sorted—or has much spare cash to throw around.

Someone might have a house, or even a few, or maybe they’re on a decent wage, but if they’re drowning in debt, living above their means, or just not great with money, it doesn’t mean they’re actually wealthy in a day-to-day sense.

 

[HoneyBunOne]

Okay thanks, yes I'm in the US, and even with delivery fees, I can't fathom paying $82 for a delivered meal.

In this instance, it works out to be roughly 1 hour of work at minimum wage = 1 adult restaurant style meal. Of course, you can get cheaper meals (pizza, take away chains etc) that work out to be about half the above, give or take, but there's nothing unusual about the pricing, nor getting food delivered. Remember, she was not a poor woman. Tight maybe, but not poor. I wouldn't read anything into this meal purchase, except that maybe she was too busy "Binging" the Inaturalist website and death cap mushrooms to cook a meal for her family, which appeared to include 2 adults at that stage.