Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #11 *Arrest*

[Lisa4]

@MrJ. @Bats thank you very much for the replies.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Defence shows more messages of Erin expressing love for in-laws​

More messages reflecting the relationship between Erin Patterson and her in-laws are shown the court.

Messages dating to May 2022 are now exhibited by the defence.

"Happy Mother's day to the best mother-in-law anyone could ever ask for," one message from Erin to Gail Patterson reads.



But then this...In Dec 2022
venting-to-friends-on-husbands-family


"So he said all that he can ask is that Simon and I get together to pray for the children ... this family I swear to f***ing god," one of Patterson's Facebook messages said.

Her friend replied to this "what morons!" and then said "anyway you weren't asking them to adjudicate you just wanted them to hear your story".
"I said to him about 50 times yesterday that I didn't want them to adjudicate, nobody bloody listens to me. At least I know they're a lost cause," Patterson responded.
"You haven't heard from Simon?" her friend said.

Her friend said "it's pathetic" and that even if Simon did not want to talk about their marriage "they could at least demand to know how he is financially supporting the kids".

"Well you have tried. I would wipe them too now," another message from a friend said.
"I suspect the best thing I can do is just to forget about all of them and live my life. Simon is probably loving how upset I am about all this," Patterson said.

Her friend said Patterson had "every right to be upset and angry" and if Simon was "loving that then it makes him even worse".
"Hopefully he will have to pay up soon," the friend said.

Erin Patterson 'venting' to friends on husband's family

www.9news.com.au

 

[LinasK]

This message just points more to the motive IMO - there is no doubt in my mind that EP loved her in laws at one point.

When the love wasn't reciprocated to the level EP wanted it - she complained:
- to her online friends that Don and Gail treated her differently to what they would treat their own daughter
- to Simon how hurt she was not to have been invited to the 70th birthday

does anyone have dates for these events to see how this correlates with this message and the alleged crime?

IMO EP felt more and more excluded from the family and the love turned to resentment and hatred.

But she wasn't their biological daughter- she was their daughter-in-law. Unless Simon had acted so aggregiously towards her, it's easy to understand parents siding with their own son over his wife.

 

[Yh5r]

But she wasn't their biological daughter- she was their daughter-in-law. Unless Simon had acted so aggregiously towards her, it's easy to understand parents siding with their own son over his wife.

I did not question what she did. I barely stated facts of what she expressed and how it flows into a motive for me.

 

[Kemug]

A lot of things just don't add up to me. JMO

RSBM
Dear MrJ,4 IMO a lot of things add up only too well!

 

[MrJ]

RSBM
Dear MrJ,4 IMO a lot of things add up only too well!

Completely agree. Only that it doesn't hold up for the accident theory imo

 

[Lisa4]

I don't believe manslaughter is on the table so it's either guilty of murder and attempted murder or not guilty.

Help me out again please?! If the defence are pleading an accident then why is manslaughter off the table?

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Seems that Prosecution has proved DC mushrooms in the food, and DC contribute to sickness of one guest. (Others similar sick & died). Also seems Proved she had knowledge & photo of one such DC on her device. And proved DC in her food dryer (not purchased at Asian Shop). Proved she reset phones after police took into evidence. And proved she at a time, had deep dislike of in-laws …

Reasonable to conclude that she did introduce the mushrooms into the recipe deliberately

Considering that she had purchased in total 1.75kg of fresh mushrooms from Woolworths in the days prior to the lunch and her Beef Wellington recipe called for 1kg, why would she need to use stinky dried mushrooms that she had previously not put into her carbonara meal?

 

[Shortfusepsb]

I just hope that every member of the jury has had personal experience with narcissism and personality disorders.

Because unless you’ve seen it firsthand—how the manipulation works, how the lies pile up, how reality gets twisted to suit the story—you might not see it at all.

It’s subtle. It’s sneaky. And from the outside, it can even look like innocence. But to those who’ve lived through it, the red flags are all too clear.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

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.

www.abc.net.au

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.

The act of using Death Cap mushrooms does not prove intent? Yet, she specifically searched for Death Cap mushrooms on her computer and looked at photos and locations of Death Caps on the iNaturalist website...

 

[SouthAussie]

You really need to focus on whether the prosecution have proven their case, regardless of what the defence have presented.
For example, hypothetically, the jury could find the defendent not guilty, even if the defence said/presented zero.

The defendent is currently sitting in court with the presumption of innocence - Not guilty. And it's up to the prosecution to change your mind.

The defendent can't be found guilty if there are other 'possibilities'. Which is what the defence is trying to show.

I don't believe manslaughter is on the table so it's either guilty of murder and attempted murder or not guilty.

MOO.

I think, in Victoria, manslaughter is automatically on the table in a murder trial ... unless it is removed, as it was in the Greg Lynn trial.
So far, we haven't heard about a removal of that stipulation. Though it wasn't till the end of the Greg Lynn trial that it was removed, so that still may happen.

It is called the alternative verdict.

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 421 Alternative verdicts on charge of murder​

S. 421(1) amended by No. 68/2009 s. 97(Sch. item 40.24).
(1) On an indictment for murder a person found not guilty of murder may be found guilty of—
(a) manslaughter;

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 421 Alternative verdicts on charge of murder

 

[Deleted member 363451]

I think, in Victoria, manslaughter is automatically on the table in a murder trial ... unless it is removed, as it was in the Greg Lynn trial.
So far, we haven't heard about a removal of that stipulation. Though it wasn't till the end of the Greg Lynn trial that it was removed, so that still may happen.

It is called the alternative verdict.

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 421 Alternative verdicts on charge of murder​

S. 421(1) amended by No. 68/2009 s. 97(Sch. item 40.24).
(1) On an indictment for murder a person found not guilty of murder may be found guilty of—
(a) manslaughter;

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 421 Alternative verdicts on charge of murder

If she isn't charged with murder and manslaughter isn't an option, does she receive no sentence at all?

 

[Detechtive]

I was thinking how you only really need one juror to think she is innocent in this - but when you read the people commenting online, etc (on various different platforms) it seems like over 95% think she is guilty. I know someone who always thinks everyone is innocent, and even she has drastically changed her opinion on this matter since hearing the trial wrap ups each day on the podcasts.

Given that the jury is going to be sequestered, the pressure the "guilty" jurors will apply to the one or two who think she's innocent will probably be amplified, IMO.

Either way, I can't see how she won't be found guilty. The defences' attempts at doubt are only making it worse for her, IMO.

 

[Detechtive]

If she isn't charged with murder and manslaughter isn't an option, does she receive no sentence at all?

She can be charged with other things if she is found not guilty.

 

[Bats]

I think, in Victoria, manslaughter is automatically on the table in a murder trial ... unless it is removed, as it was in the Greg Lynn trial.
So far, we haven't heard about a removal of that stipulation. Though it wasn't till the end of the Greg Lynn trial that it was removed, so that still may happen.

It is called the alternative verdict.

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 421 Alternative verdicts on charge of murder​

S. 421(1) amended by No. 68/2009 s. 97(Sch. item 40.24).
(1) On an indictment for murder a person found not guilty of murder may be found guilty of—
(a) manslaughter;

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 421 Alternative verdicts on charge of murder

Thanks @SouthAussie !

The reason I am presuming it's not on the table is that i think we would have heard it was available for consideration at the start of the trial.

Also, i think the trial may have been presented a little differently in terms of the evidence, if manslaughter was on the table.

Totally my opinion only. I may be incorrect here.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

I was thinking how you only really need one juror to think she is innocent in this - but when you read the people commenting online, etc (on various different platforms) it seems like over 95% think she is guilty. I know someone who always thinks everyone is innocent, and even she has drastically changed her opinion on this matter since hearing the trial wrap ups each day on the podcasts.

Given that the jury is going to be sequestered, the pressure the "guilty" jurors will apply to the one or two who think she's innocent will probably be amplified, IMO.

Either way, I can't see how she won't be found guilty. The defences' attempts at doubt are only making it worse for her, IMO.

Logically everything you say is right and maybe I'm just a sceptic, but I really do think she will not be charged with murder. I really hope that I'm wrong...

 

[Detechtive]

Logically everything you say is right and maybe I'm just a sceptic, but I really do think she will not be charged with murder. I really hope that I'm wrong...

Convicted of murder, you mean?

I highly doubt that the Prosecution will be satisfied with Erin walking away from this if found not guilty. A retrial, new evidence, other charges, etc - I doubt they will leave it alone, tbh. 3 people died.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Convicted of murder, you mean?

I highly doubt that the Prosecution will be satisfied with Erin walking away from this if found not guilty. A retrial, new evidence, other charges, etc - I doubt they will leave it alone, tbh. 3 people died.

Yes, sorry I meant convicted of murder. I hope that she is, as there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that she planned for them to die.

 

[Lisa4]

Sure. You could explain it all away -

A bored SAHM with an interest in mushrooms and DC mushrooms, who just wanted to go see them in real life one autumn day...

Sure, she bought a dehydrator - merely interested in mushrooms and hoping to start a hobby of picking and drying safe ones...

Sure, she threw it away, but it was just a fleeting moment of thoughtless, needless panic, could happen to anyone, couldn't it...

Sure, she got a bit over-anxious about cancer fears and got carried away with wanting to talk to the in-laws about it...

You  could explain it all away - except for one thing.

They're dead. Of deathcaps.

And she's not.


(All allegedly.)

 

[MrJ]

Sure. You could explain it all away -

A bored SAHM with an interest in mushrooms and DC mushrooms, who just wanted to go see them in real life one autumn day...

Sure, she bought a dehydrator - merely interested in mushrooms and hoping to start a hobby of picking and drying safe ones...

Sure, she threw it away, but it was just a fleeting moment of thoughtless, needless panic, could happen to anyone, couldn't it...

Sure, she got a bit over-anxious about cancer fears and got carried away with wanting to talk to the in-laws about it...

You  could explain it all away - except for one thing.

They're dead. Of deathcaps.


(Allegedly.)

Don’t forget going alone into a room to talk to your lawyer - just a normal precaution after all…. and (allegedly) wiping your phone. She just doesn’t want the police to find anything potentially incriminating…. JMO IMO