- Joined
- Nov 11, 2013
- Messages
- 13,538
- Reaction score
- 89,256
Phone messages under scrutiny in Erin Patterson mushroom murder 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.

2m ago
More Q + A with Mushroom Case Daily
By Kristian Silva and Stephen Stockwell
Court reporter Kristian Silva and producer Stephen Stockwell are also answering all the questions you have about the trial.To get in touch and ask the team something, write to [email protected].
Q: When you say that the prosecutor needs to prove that Erin intended to cause death or very, very serious harm, the prosecutor can prove she intentionally used death cap mushrooms in the meal. Does the act of using death cap mushrooms itself prove intent? Or does the prosecutor need to prove that she meant to seriously harm the guests as opposed to perhaps making them a little bit sick or uncomfortable? - Kourosh
A: The defence is saying that the act of using death cap mushrooms does not prove intent, and I think that's a fair inference to draw because the defence says that this was a tragic accident.
The defence is not disputing that death cap mushrooms were in the meal, but they absolutely dispute that Erin ever intended to pick death cap mushrooms and they dispute that she ever intended to harm the guests at all.
As to the seriousness of harm that may be caused, with the murder charge it does say you have to prove that the defendant intended to kill someone or cause them very serious injury to prove a murder charge.
If Erin Patterson intended to make them a little bit sick or uncomfortable, if that's what the jury believes, that is not far enough to prove that element of the murder charge.