Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #13 *Arrest*

[browneyes]

If the prosecutions mix-up of the days is, in fact, deliberate, that is very sneaky of them.

Strategic

 

[katydid23]

Isn’t it curious that Erin never mentioned Simon’s coma and very serious stay in the ICU as further reasons the children might be fearful or anxious about hospitals? He almost died! That would be very significant for young children.

Unless I missed something?

No, you're right. I don't think she ever mentioned Simon's hospital stay. No surprise

 

[JBowie]

She's quite possibly a compulsive liar - a person who feels compelled to lie about all kinds of things, both serious and inconsequential.

I've opined earlier that the prosecution could have opened their cross-examination of EP with: "Lying comes easily to you, doesn't it?"

The defence would likely instantly object, but the point would have been made with the jury.

 

[JBowie]

Erin has a best friend

Birds of a feather ...

 

[MsMarple]

This seems to be a lie that Erin has just made up on the fly while on the stand.

Did she not think that they would check???

That seems to be her MO throughout her testimony. She adjusts her answers in order to continue her narrative and if she can’t produce an explanation then she has a sudden attack of amnesia. If that fails then she just disagrees with the prosecution.

She’s had a couple years to hone her story. But it seems that she underestimated Dr. Rogers and didn’t anticipate how prepared and incisive she's been with her cross. Erin may be smart but she’s no chess player. IMO she’s outmatched on the stand.

 

[katydid23]

So, here are the triggers for 2 of the 3 objections [bbm]:

After the lunch break, Dr Rogers began questioning Ms Patterson about her “claims” of experience foraging wild mushrooms.

“In your evidence to this jury I suggest you have laid new claims about foraging?” Dr Rogers asked.

“What do you mean by new?” Ms Patterson responded.

The accused woman confirmed she told police in her interview on

August 5, 2023, she had not foraged for mushrooms.

“In your evidence to this jury we are hearing for the first time your claims to foraging mushrooms,” Dr Rogers said before Ms Patterson’s barrister Colin Mandy SC objected to the question.

Justice Christopher Beale asked Dr Rogers to rephrase the question.

“I take it what you’re wanting to get at is that there’s no evidence of Ms Patterson telling police, other witnesses in the case, she foraged for mushrooms,” Justice Beale asked.

“Yes,” Dr Rogers said before rephrasing the question.

“In the evidence, in this trial, you told a number of people you hadn’t foraged for mushrooms?” the prosecutor asked.

“I told the police I had never foraged but I didn’t say that to the other witnesses, I told them I’d not put foraged mushrooms in the meal,” Ms Patterson responded.

Dr Rogers told Ms Patterson in her evidence to the jury she said she’d foraged for wild mushrooms between 2020 and 2023, questioning “you never told anyone before now?”.

Mr Mandy objected again and the jury stood down.

When they returned Dr Rogers moved the topic of questioning to electronic devices located at Ms Patterson’s home.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/erin-patterson-trial-alleged-mushroom-poisoner-to-give-evidence-for-seventh-day/news-story/8de6b240063da071c1f1865a022a3e9c

This is really interesting. I hope Dr R is able to figure out a way to rephrase or reframe this issue and have at it. I think it's really important.

It's kind of the crux of the issue. IF someone forages mushrooms routinely, knows what they're doing, but sadly they make an honest mistake one time----then perhaps people are willing to accept it was a tragic accident.

But what if someone does not have any experience or training foraging? What if they just secretly, randomly, happened to have picked some wild mushrooms they saw under some Oak trees in a park? And they did not check with anyone else who does have expertise to check if these were safe?

And so they dried them, powdered them, and then months later added them to a meal they were serving to their in-laws?

No mention to anyone ever that she had these foraged mushrooms powdered and ready to go?

Does that kind of a scenario fit into the innocent accident kind of tragedy?

Or is it closer to criminal negligence, in that there was not the duty of care which is necessary to keep things safe?

 

[MaxDecimus13]

Exactly right.

I keep seeing people on other forums say Erin is stupid and that concerns me because if people think of her through that lense, it’s much easier to think that she couldn’t possibly premeditate such a thing.

I have no doubt if Erin was hypothetically planning what she is accused of, that she would know every single thing about the topic. The thing she is not good at is people and predicting how they will behave, which is her undoing here, IMO.

If it wasn’t for Simon taking the inlaws to hospital and the hospital quickly cottoning on that this was Death Cap poisoning, it’s possible we would not be here.

I’m sure she didn’t think her friends would betray her (in her mind) and share private photos she shared. Or disclosing to the police that she hid powdered mushrooms in the kids food.

I’m sure she didn’t think police would be looking at her bank statements days after the lunch and seeing her dispose of the dehydrator, etc. I doubt they would have even started looking at her so soon if it wasn’t for her refusing to answer the questions initially. IMO

You're going to get bombarded now!

On the flip side of it, would she be somebody who would be possible making a mistake like picking DC mushrooms if she'd already looked into them?

For instance, there is somebody on this forum who stated that an outbreak in Canberra stopped them from foraging. If Erin was aware of the dangers of picking wild mushrooms, would she be likely to male a mistake like this?

She strikes me as somebody who would almost know everything about a topic, and dare I say it possibly in a slightly obsessive way. I've long suspected some neurodiverse traits which could account for the way she has come across at times.

 

[JBowie]

No mention to anyone ever that she had these foraged mushrooms powdered and ready to go?

Does that kind of a scenario fit into the innocent accident kind of tragedy?

And ensured that her children did not 'accidentally' consume them.

 

[MsMarple]

Patterson was reminded her son and daughter said they were told they had been served leftovers from the lunch.
'Because mum said it was leftovers,' the son told police.
Patterson agreed with her son that she had served him leftovers.
The daughter also told police 'mum told me' she was served leftovers.
'I only remember telling the kids on the Sunday that it was leftovers,' Patterson said.
'I don't remember telling them anything about it being lunch leftovers.'


Now this is just ridiculous. And serves no purpose.

What were they leftovers from Erin, the kids McDonald’s lunch? the son’s Subway dinner? The sandwich and wrap bought from the service station? Or the hot dog and dim sims from the Koo Wee Rup doughnut van?
I can’t begin to imagine how much gaslighting went on in Erin’s relationships with Simon and the children.
IMO

Erin Patterson mushroom murder trial LIVE updates

Follow Daily Mail Australia's live coverage of accused mushroom chef Erin Patterson's murder trial here.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Ugh, that family sure eats a lot of junky food! It’s a bit surprising that Erin allowed it for her kids given her frustration over her own weight and poor eating habits. But then I have no experience with eating disorders.

I wonder if her medical records disclosed anything about her bulimia?

 

[JBowie]

And she thinks people are going to swallow this? (pun intended)

The court previously heard Ms Patterson told a health official she thought the mushrooms had smelled funny after purchasing them and she had initially avoided using them.

Dr Rogers put to Ms Patterson that "if they were overpowering, surely you would have been worried" about putting them in the beef Wellington.

"No, I didn't think that. I thought it was the perfect dish for them," Ms Patterson responded.

Accused killer Patterson fed children leftovers despite illness, court told

Erin Patterson has told a Supreme Court jury that she fed her children the leftovers of a deadly beef Wellington lunch despite experiencing diarrhoea after eating it.

www.abc.net.au

 

[browneyes]

Ugh, that family sure eats a lot of junky food! It’s a bit surprising that Erin allowed it for her kids given her frustration over her own weight and poor eating habits. But then I have no experience with eating disorders.

I wonder if her medical records disclosed anything about her bulimia?

IF she has an eating disorder. IMO

 

[browneyes]

And she thinks people are going to swallow this? (pun intended)

The court previously heard Ms Patterson told a health official she thought the mushrooms had smelled funny after purchasing them and she had initially avoided using them.

Dr Rogers put to Ms Patterson that "if they were overpowering, surely you would have been worried" about putting them in the beef Wellington.

"No, I didn't think that. I thought it was the perfect dish for them," Ms Patterson responded.

Accused killer Patterson fed children leftovers despite illness, court told

Erin Patterson has told a Supreme Court jury that she fed her children the leftovers of a deadly beef Wellington lunch despite experiencing diarrhoea after eating it.

www.abc.net.au

Just for me, Erin is a bundle of lies and arrogance. JMO I would hate to be on this jury.

 

[browneyes]

She has the worst memory of anyone in the world, doesn't she? she can't recall this, she doesn't remember that....

IMO, she has a selective memory. She also corrects the prosecutor over the dumbest details.

 

[JBowie]

Just for me, Erin is a bundle of lies and arrogance. JMO I would hate to be on this jury.

The jurors are probably hoping never to hear about mushrooms ever again, after this.

 

[Megnut]

So, according to this report, the reason the jury was sent out 3 times after the lunch break on Wednesday was because the defence objected to prosecution questions. OK, so what were those questions?

Truth: I don't think the Defense was objecting to the State 's questions so much as trying to pre-empt EP from answering. Effectively objecting to her answers.

They are officers of the court, trying to save her from perjuring herself outright.

JMO

 

[Megnut]

The jurors are probably hoping never to hear about mushrooms ever again, after this.

There is one sad mushroom growing in my yard. I don't have a food dehydrator. But even if I did, I'm not touching thing.

EP is decidedly not the campaign face for mushroom growers international.

They all scare me now.

JMO

 

[JBowie]

EP is decidedly not the campaign face for mushroom growers international.

... and she's probably put the kibosh on beef Wellington.

 

[Montrealaise]

That seems to be her MO throughout her testimony. She adjusts her answers in order to continue her narrative and if she can’t produce an explanation then she has a sudden attack of amnesia. If that fails then she just disagrees with the prosecution.

She’s had a couple years to hone her story. But it seems that she underestimated Dr. Rogers and didn’t anticipate how prepared and incisive she's been with her cross. Erin may be smart but she’s no chess player. IMO she’s outmatched on the stand.

If her attorneys decided it was a good idea to put her on the stand, they must have regretted that decision a thousand times by now (I say "if" because sometimes a defense attorney will advise a client not to testify but the client, who thinks she's so much smarter than the prosecutors, insists anyway).

The jurors only have one question to answer: were the deaths a tragic accident, or cold-blooded murder? Was EP an amateur forager who made a terrible mistake, or did she carefully plan and execute the deaths of her in-laws? That's what the prosecutors have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense, of course, has to plant the reasonable doubt. IMO the prosecutors did well enough before EP took the stand but of course it wasn't a slam dunk. However, EP's testimony has now made it a slam dunk.

 

[Montrealaise]

... and she's probably put the kibosh on beef Wellington.

I know that I'll never be able to look at Beef Wellington in the same way ever again.

 

[Megnut]

... and she's probably put the kibosh on beef Wellington.

Exactly. There's no telling what's in the kibosh.