Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #14 *Arrest*

[MrJ]

The evidence is over. I feel like Woody in Toy Story 3 saying ‘so long partner’. Erin regardless of the verdict you’ve given me hearty laughs thanks to your testimony and responses to questioning.

 

[L_B]

Right, but she said she had an appointment for bariatric surgery all set up.

In reality, she never did anything but call and ask for a visit---but then called and cancelled. So all the BS about needing childcare while she received treatments for ovarian cancer still stand.

Oh yeah I agree with you. I just meant that I do personally believe the clinic offered that service in 2023. But regardless it doesn't really help her original claim the cancer lie was to cover up for a bypass, that somehow was mistaken for lipo.
Maybe with her hospital aversion she hoped that she could bypass (haha) the usual route of seeing a surgeon and get it done at a cosmetic clinic instead.

 

[LinasK]

Exactlyyyyyy....the defence going through this again just emphasised her deception, if anything. She just admitted she had an appointment to determine what she might need, almost sounds like a very preliminary discussion.....nothing even close to a fully-fledged surgery or liposuction.

Yeah, you can get free consultations. And there was no need to hype out relatives for a diagnosis she didn't have and procedures that weren't scheduled. This luncheon WAS special, but not for the reasons she wanted people to think.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Why isn't she asking her where phone A is!?

Exactly !!

 

[lazymaiden07]

I thought I read somewhere there may be new evidence presented?
Anyway, the next step will be closing arguments, is that correct? Do we know how far away that might be?

 

[Scooby-Doo]

@LinasK you must be happy that Dr Rogers mentioned that someone with diarrhoea wouldn't have consumed coffee.
Maybe she's been reading your posts here

And wearing her white pants

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Where are we up to in the trial?​

As Erin Patterson's trial comes to the end of its seventh week, the evidence in the case has concluded.

If you've been following coverage of the trial, you'd be aware we've heard the prosecution's case over the past few weeks.

This has included evidence from doctors, nurses, experts in fungi and mobile phone towers and those who had direct contact with Erin Patterson in the lead-up to the lunch and its aftermath.

Ms Patterson has just spent eight days in the witness box for the defence, wrapping up with a final re-examination by her barrister Colin Mandy SC just before lunch.

The jury's left for the day, to allow legal discussions to take place.

In the coming days, there'll be closing arguments from both sides and final instructions from the judge to the jury before they begin deliberating to reach a verdict.

Last week, Justice Christopher Beale indicated getting through all of the above could push things towards the end of June.

 

[L_B]

Can someone find the 4 points the jury have to weigh the evidence up against?

 

[Jake18]

The evidence is over. I feel like Woody in Toy Story 3 saying ‘so long partner’. Erin regardless of the verdict you’ve given me hearty laughs thanks to your testimony and responses to questioning.

And we’ve all been treated to extensive discussions about each others’ dinner plates

 

[JBowie]

Shortly afterwards, Mr Mandy announces he's wrapped up his questioning.

Saints be praised!

 

[MrJ]

The closings are gonna be fantastic

 

[JBowie]

and final instructions from the judge to the jury before they begin deliberating to reach a verdict.

My guess is that he'll be saying, inter alia, that a litany of lies does not necessarily automatically make a person guilty -- which may be true -- but it sure doesn't paint them as innocent either IMO.

 

[Doesitmakesense]

I thought I read somewhere there may be new evidence presented?
Anyway, the next step will be closing arguments, is that correct? Do we know how far away that might be?

I think possible part of their lengthy legal discussions might be if anything that was said brings about needing further rebuttal evidence

 

[Scuffy35]

The closings are gonna be fantastic

For the prosecution, there won't be so much of a need to join all the dots in their closing argument now, compared to before they cross examined Erin.

I think they missed some big opportunities in expert witnesses eg cross contamination of DC toxins being absorbed into the beef and other items when in the oven. Will have to depend now on the jurors using their common sense, if that is allowed.

 

[Doesitmakesense]

For the prosecution, there won't be so much of a need to join all the dots in their closing argument now, compared to before they cross examined Erin.

I think they missed some big opportunities in expert witnesses eg cross contamination of DC toxins being absorbed into the beef and other items when in the oven. Will have to depend now on the jurors using their common sense, if that is allowed.

I'm hoping they bring someone in to state if vomiting a few hours after the meal would have the effect EP states

 

[JBowie]

I don't think the defence reached the standard of reasonable doubt.

More to the point, I think, is is did (or will) the prosecution provide the jury with sufficient evidence of a motive for murder.

Although there is no legal requirement for a motive to be declared, IMO human beings in such circumstances will inevitably be asking themselves, why she would want to kill those people.

 

[AussieIan]

I really don't understand if it was intentional murder why she reacted the way she did after the fact. If it was not a crime of passion, being prepared and planned months previous why is she disposing of the dehydrator after the police get involved, why not months ago after she'd powdered them. Why the lying which surely you knew was going to be investigated at that point.

I think she's telling half truths. My train of thought being:

She meant to make them sick as 'punishment' for not taking her side In disagreements with SP/feeling pushed out

It went way beyond what she expected and she panicked, resulting in poorly thought out lies and actions

Now In court, with plenty of time to collect herself, she can't admit she poisoned them on purpose.

The lies are an issue. She can however explain away her lies by using legitimate reasoning about being panicked.

Although she likely lied because she knew what was wrong, she can play off those lies as panic about being blamed.

I think there's a term for it, when people fool polygraphs and the like by answering questions in a particular partial truth manner. It reminds me of that.

I've just finished a double so this might be a bit poorly thought out. I just don't really understand her logic.

 

[lazymaiden07]

Can someone find the 4 points the jury have to weigh the evidence up against?

(Via the ABC)

The four elements to murder are:

1. 1.Did Erin Patterson cause the deaths of the lunch guests? If the jury is satisfied of that, they can move on to number two;
2. 2.Did she do it deliberately? If they're satisfied of that, then they need to look at;
3. 3.Did she do it with an intention to kill them or to cause really serious injury — emphasis on the word really. If they're satisfied of that, we get to the final point;
4. 4.Did she commit the killing without a lawful justification or excuse, such as in self-defense, which is not relevant to this case.

 

[Camp Chair 2.0]

It's just absurd. Gastric bypass is a clinical medical procedure through specialists in a hospital setting. Liposuction is a cosmetic procedure done in private clinics, I believe. They are nothing alike.

If we put aside the unlikely oversight of not realising gastric surgery wasn’t on the services menu… just a cold-blind appt made? No evidence of a deep dive into either bariatric surgery or liposuction - for someone of her inclination to research things. Nothing on record with GP, no digital footprint of Dr Google research, no membership of FB groups seeking recommendations or experiences of others to support this? Absurd, alright!

 

[mamamama9873]

The loss of these 3 beautiful people is just horrific (whether it was intentional or accidental). Having lost a parent of a similar age very unexpectedly and suddenly (due to natural causes), I cannot even fathom what the families who are left behind have been going through.
I notice the absence of victim impact statements from the trial, are these not usually presented to court during trials.