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

[Jake18]

Timelinewise, it fits with her going back home. She needed her son out of the house for some reason. I wonder what she told him. Drops him off and says....?

I keep wondering, if they weren't tipped to mushrooms in the first place, would they have ultimately isolated the Death Cap toxin, would it have been discoverable later?

Did it have allure as a vanishing poison?

JMO

The toxicologist said that the Death cap toxin is hard to detect, with a small time frame of detection in urine. IIRC Don and Ian tested positive, Heather and Gail were negative but the lunch guests weren’t tested on arrival, as Death Cap wasn’t initially thought to be the culprit - it was the meat that was suspected.

EP’s urine wasn’t tested until 51 hours after the meal, so a negative toxin test isn’t that meaningful. I think the defence will try to argue that she ate the tainted mushrooms but was lucky, maybe because she was young and supposedly healthy

 

[MrJ]

I find it difficult to be objective about this case because once EP started lying she lost her credibility to me. IMO

 

[LinasK]

So, the defense has been trying to poke holes in some of the government's claims:

• That Erin didn't pick the death caps at the time/place the prosecution alleges
• That Erin actually did buy mushrooms at an Asian store, there's just no record of it
• That Erin didn't tell her guests she had cancer, only that she was worried she could have it
• That Erin did fall ill from the mushrooms, just less severely than her guests

But I'm struggling a bit to put these defense assertions into context. Maybe we'll get a more definitive account before they rest, but at this point I'm still unsure what the defense believes actually occurred.

Specifically I'd like to know why she had the guests over for lunch that day. How did the death caps end up in the food? And how did Erin come to be so relatively unharmed with no discernible organ damage?

So if there's no record of her buying mushrooms in an Asian grocery store, how does it prove that she did? And no Asian grocery store sells Death Cap mushrooms- which are the toxin- not generic ones bought at Woolworth's.

 

[Warshawski]

Only the son ate something from Subway to my understanding. Teens are funny with the food they like and I could image the son being keener to eat Subway instead of Beef Wellington

Plus daughter was still with their father, so maybe she thought she’d save the steak meal for when both were home.

 

[BreakingNews]

Interesting that Victoria still has the ballot system when additional jurors are empaneled.Qld and NT have a system of reserve jurors.
The difference being the ballot system is really disliked by jurors. You can sit through a trial for 6 weeks, then get sent home before deliberating starts. The dynamics of the group changes just as they are about to deliberate.
In the reserve jury system, all jurors know from the start that the first 12 jurors are the jury, and the reserves slot in if one of the first 12 is sick etc. It works in the order you are chosen.

5. Additional jurors - Victorian Law Reform Commission

Introduction 5.1 The terms of reference ask the Commission to give consideration to section 48 of the Juries Act 2000 (Vic) (Juries Act) and whether it is necessary or desirable for the jury to be reduced to 12 (or six for civil trials) before the jury retires to consider its verdict. The...

www.lawreform.vic.gov.au

 

[Kemug]

Was she disposing of evidence, or couldn't drive more than 4 minutes without stopping for a snack?

Actually, maybe she had a drinking problem and needed a drink. Just a thought.

 

[ch_13]

So if there's no record of her buying mushrooms in an Asian grocery store, how does it prove that she did? And no Asian grocery store sells Death Cap mushrooms- which are the toxin- not generic ones bought at Woolworth's.

I'm just trying to get around my head around what the defense is actually claiming. Presumably they have some kind of story to tell about how the mushrooms got where they were and why Erin was unharmed. But for the life of me, I can't figure out what they contend actually happened.

 

[LinasK]

I'm just trying to get around my head around what the defense is actually claiming. Presumably they have some kind of story to tell about how the mushrooms got where they were and why Erin was unharmed. But for the life of me, I can't figure out what they contend actually happened.

She figured that by using the Woolworth's mushrooms, that mushrooms would be ruled out as the cause. She's not as intelligent as she thinks.

 

[Kemug]

Regardless, the main point remains - why did she not get anywhere near as sick as any of the guests ( IMO allegedly having diarrhoea while still being able to go on a long drive and drink coffee is in stark contrast to the symptoms the lunch guests suffered from).

And "suffered" is truly the word.

 

[Megnut]

I'm just trying to get around my head around what the defense is actually claiming. Presumably they have some kind of story to tell about how the mushrooms got where they were and why Erin was unharmed. But for the life of me, I can't figure out what they contend actually happened.

I don't think they will put forth a linear argument. Just continue to poke at witnesses here and there. As in other cases, when doubt isn't possible, defense settles for confusion.

JMO

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Interesting that Victoria still has the ballot system when additional jurors are empaneled.Qld and NT have a system of reserve jurors.
The difference being the ballot system is really disliked by jurors. You can sit through a trial for 6 weeks, then get sent home before deliberating starts. The dynamics of the group changes just as they are about to deliberate.
In the reserve jury system, all jurors know from the start that the first 12 jurors are the jury, and the reserves slot in if one of the first 12 is sick etc. It works in the order you are chosen.

5. Additional jurors - Victorian Law Reform Commission

Introduction 5.1 The terms of reference ask the Commission to give consideration to section 48 of the Juries Act 2000 (Vic) (Juries Act) and whether it is necessary or desirable for the jury to be reduced to 12 (or six for civil trials) before the jury retires to consider its verdict. The...

www.lawreform.vic.gov.au

The reserve jury system seems more sensible to me.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Good point.

I've been trying to think on that.

We know that this trip was the very first time that EP was in a vehicle and away from her home since the lunch ended, earlier that day.

So IF she had some things she wanted to toss out this would be her first and best chance. But I'm not sure what those things are.

I'm wondering if during Closings, the P will throw a possible scenario out there---like ' she smashed phone A and tossed it nto a dumpster'. Or she threw out the remaining BW she had reserved for Simon' ???

The grey plates?

 

[Old Soul]

If anyone is interested in hearing a bit more detail about some of EP’s text conversations with SP that were read during the trial, I recommend the Daily Mail podcast THE TRIAL OF ERIN PATTERSON. The most recent episode “testing the evidence” gave me some insight into her personality and their relationship dynamics. To me it is very much about her using her health concerns to garner attention and sympathy from her husband. I think she was a regular user of “doctor Google” and thus probably had a pretty good understanding of the symptoms, timelines and outcomes of death cap poisoning.
Also it is quite amusing to hear the texts and Facebook messages voiced by actors in this podcast.

NEW PODCAST: The Trial of Erin Patterson, the 'mushroom

On the new season of our No.1 True Crime podcast, we'll be covering the case of Australian mother-of-two Erin Patterson, the 'mushroom cook.' Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts now.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[MsMarple]

Here’s an account of Erin’s 21 minute interview with LE:

Erin Patterson given voice as interview with police fills in some blanks: week five in court

As much as any moment, the video shown to the Victorian supreme court helped give the murder accused shape after weeks of silence

www.theguardian.com

It’s enough to raise your blood pressure. For example:

[Erin] “Because I do want to know what happened … so I’ve given them as much information as they’ve asked for and offered up all the food and all the information about where the food came from.”

Eppingstall went on to ask Patterson if she had ever foraged for mushrooms or owned a dehydrator.

“Obviously, we’ve got concerns in relation to these mushrooms and where they’ve come from,” he said.

“Mm,” Patterson responded.

“OK. Is that something you’ve done in the past, foraging for mushrooms?”

“Never.”

“Or anything like that? Never?”

“Never.”

 

[MrJ]

Saw this in the link provided in the last post.

"Nothing that’s ever happened between us – nothing he’s ever done to me will change the fact that they’re good, decent people that have never done anything wrong by me ever.”

Bolded by me. Could EP be referring to the abusive and controlling allegations she said to her fb friends. And it doesn't explain the nasty messages on Facebook about her in laws either. Seems a bit two-faced to me imo

 

[Eloise]

I'm just trying to get around my head around what the defense is actually claiming. Presumably they have some kind of story to tell about how the mushrooms got where they were and why Erin was unharmed. But for the life of me, I can't figure out what they contend actually happened.

they don't need to claim anything, just poke holes in the prosecution case to the point that there's reasonable doubt

 

[Scuffy35]

I don't think they will put forth a linear argument. Just continue to poke at witnesses here and there. As in other cases, when doubt isn't possible, defense settles for confusion.

JMO

It seems such a risky and desperate strategy to settle for confusion. It would be better to take a plea deal if one was available, in my opinion.

It might be a bit early to say though, as the defence's turn to present witnesses (if they have any), and maybe tell a narrative through them, has not begun yet.

 

[SouthAussie]

It seems such a risky and desperate strategy to settle for confusion. It would be better to take a plea deal if one was available, in my opinion.

It might be a bit early to say though, as the defence's turn to present witnesses (if they have any), and maybe tell a narrative through them, has not begun yet.

Even if the defence recommended that Erin requests a plea deal, she could just tell them no, then they would have to put on the best defence they could think of.

imo

 

[Bats]

I don't think they will put forth a linear argument. Just continue to poke at witnesses here and there. As in other cases, when doubt isn't possible, defense settles for confusion.

JMO

I'm not sure the defence will be trying to cause confusion.
It's my guess that the defence will focus on a couple of key factors. Their overall argument is that the poisonings were an accident but I think they'll focus on parts that are the easiest for the jury to be uncertain about and that if they were to be slightly uncertain about, the whole case falls apart.

Strap yourselves in because when the judge rules on how the jury can use the prosecution's evidence, I guarantee eyebrows will be raised.

 

[SouthAussie]

Strap yourselves in because when the judge rules on how the jury can use the prosecution's evidence, I guarantee eyebrows will be raised.

What are you anticipating, @Bats ?