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

[MrJ]

1m ago
Prosecutor tells jury 'usual phone' was not given to police during search

By Joseph Dunstan

Dr Rogers then turns to the issue of the phone Ms Patterson gave to police when they came to her house a week after the lunch.

The prosecution has asserted that a phone referred to in the trial as Phone A was Ms Patterson's "usual phone", but the phone she gave to police was another one, referred to as Phone B.

"When police asked the accused to hand over her phone during the search warrant ... they expected to receive her usual mobile phone," Dr Rogers says.

She says phone records support the prosecution's claim that Phone A was the usual phone and that while police were searching Ms Patterson's house, the accused swapped out the SIM card.

She says the jury should reject "any suggestion" by the defence that Ms Patterson had adopted Phone B as her usual phone by the time of the search.

 

[Detechtive]

Jury urged to consider why the dehydrator was dumped​

ByMarta Pascual Juanola
Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, is back on her feet to continue delivering her closing address to the Supreme Court jury sitting in Morwell.

As she does so, members of the Patterson and Wilkinson families, including lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson and his adult children, are sitting in the public gallery in courtroom 4.

Rogers has taken the jury to evidence heard during the trial about Erin Patterson dumping her dehydrator at the Koonwarra Transfer Station the day after being discharged from Monash Medical Centre, in the days following the lunch.

“The accused not only lied to cover-up what she had done, she disposed of the evidence,” Rogers said.

She accused Patterson of dumping the dehydrator to hide the evidence, not because the accused woman panicked and was worried that she would be falsely accused, as the prosecutor expected the defence team would claim.

“You should completely reject that position. Her story about [estranged husband] Simon [Patterson] accusing her in the hospital of using the dehydrator and this sending her into a panic is nonsense,” Rogers told the jury. She said Simon Patterson had denied saying such a thing to Erin Patterson.

“If there was nothing incriminating about the dehydrator, why hide it?” Rogers said.

The prosecutor said Patterson did so because the appliance would incriminate her, as she knew she had dehydrated death cap mushrooms in that appliance, and, Rogers said, she had deliberately done so.

If not for the careful analysis of Patterson’s bank records, no one would ever have known about the dehydrator, Rogers said.

Erin Patterson murder trial day 33 as it happened: Accused mushroom cook lied to authorities and in witness box, prosecutor says in concluding argument; defence argues no intent, panic explains actions

Inside courtroom four in Morwell, Patterson, on trial for murder, listened intently as prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, concluded her closing argument, and defence barrister Colin Mandy, SC, commenced his.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Cliff Hardy]

1m ago
Prosecutor tells jury 'usual phone' was not given to police during search

By Joseph Dunstan

Dr Rogers then turns to the issue of the phone Ms Patterson gave to police when they came to her house a week after the lunch.

The prosecution has asserted that a phone referred to in the trial as Phone A was Ms Patterson's "usual phone", but the phone she gave to police was another one, referred to as Phone B.

"When police asked the accused to hand over her phone during the search warrant ... they expected to receive her usual mobile phone," Dr Rogers says.

She says phone records support the prosecution's claim that Phone A was the usual phone and that while police were searching Ms Patterson's house, the accused swapped out the SIM card.

She says the jury should reject "any suggestion" by the defence that Ms Patterson had adopted Phone B as her usual phone by the time of the search.

The noose is tightening this morning.

Wonder how much longer Nanette Rogers will continue? It has been a marathon summing up.

 

[MrJ]

1m ago
Timeline of factory resets

By Judd Boaz

Dr Rogers lays out a chronology for Ms Patterson's Samsung mobile phone, which was factory reset three times following the deadly lunch:

August 2: Dr Rogers says this reset occurred day after Ms Patterson left hospital, and around 20 minutes before she dumped the dehydrator at the Koonwarra tip.
August 5: This reset occurred while police were searching Erin Patterson’s phone. Dr Rogers says expert evidence shows the reset was done physically by someone holding the phone, suggesting it must have occurred at 1.20pm.
August 6: The prosecution says this factory reset occurred remotely, while the phone was at a police station after being seized by investigators.

 

[Kemug]

I am up early this morning. I have to wait four hours before Dr Rogers’ closing statements. This is torture!

We appreciate your sacrifice! An extra (brownie) point for you!

 

[MsMarple]

Jury urged to consider why the dehydrator was dumped​

ByMarta Pascual Juanola
Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, is back on her feet to continue delivering her closing address to the Supreme Court jury sitting in Morwell.

As she does so, members of the Patterson and Wilkinson families, including lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson and his adult children, are sitting in the public gallery in courtroom 4.

Rogers has taken the jury to evidence heard during the trial about Erin Patterson dumping her dehydrator at the Koonwarra Transfer Station the day after being discharged from Monash Medical Centre, in the days following the lunch.

“The accused not only lied to cover-up what she had done, she disposed of the evidence,” Rogers said.

She accused Patterson of dumping the dehydrator to hide the evidence, not because the accused woman panicked and was worried that she would be falsely accused, as the prosecutor expected the defence team would claim.

“You should completely reject that position. Her story about [estranged husband] Simon [Patterson] accusing her in the hospital of using the dehydrator and this sending her into a panic is nonsense,” Rogers told the jury. She said Simon Patterson had denied saying such a thing to Erin Patterson.

“If there was nothing incriminating about the dehydrator, why hide it?” Rogers said.

The prosecutor said Patterson did so because the appliance would incriminate her, as she knew she had dehydrated death cap mushrooms in that appliance, and, Rogers said, she had deliberately done so.

If not for the careful analysis of Patterson’s bank records, no one would ever have known about the dehydrator, Rogers said.

Erin Patterson murder trial day 33 as it happened: Accused mushroom cook lied to authorities and in witness box, prosecutor says in concluding argument; defence argues no intent, panic explains actions

Inside courtroom four in Morwell, Patterson, on trial for murder, listened intently as prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, concluded her closing argument, and defence barrister Colin Mandy, SC, commenced his.

www.theage.com.au

Ugh, what must Ian and his children be thinking? Here sits a woman who they welcomed into the family fold, who Heather always made a point of making sure she never sat alone in church. The same woman now on trial for murdering Heather in cold blood. And Don and Gail.

I can’t begin to imagine what this gentle soul feels about Erin but I sure know how I feel.

 

[Detechtive]

1m ago
Timeline of factory resets

By Judd Boaz

Dr Rogers lays out a chronology for Ms Patterson's Samsung mobile phone, which was factory reset three times following the deadly lunch:

August 2: Dr Rogers says this reset occurred day after Ms Patterson left hospital, and around 20 minutes before she dumped the dehydrator at the Koonwarra tip.
August 5: This reset occurred while police were searching Erin Patterson’s phone. Dr Rogers says expert evidence shows the reset was done physically by someone holding the phone, suggesting it must have occurred at 1.20pm.
August 6: The prosecution says this factory reset occurred remotely, while the phone was at a police station after being seized by investigators.

I think they meant 'while searching the house' - nonetheless, these factory resets are very damning, IMO

 

[Detechtive]

We appreciate your sacrifice! An extra (brownie) point for you!

Don't eat the brownies, MrJ!

 

[MrJ]

I think they meant 'while searching the house' - nonetheless, these factory resets are very damning, IMO

1m ago
Prosecutor tells jury factory reset of phone done as police searched home

By Joseph Dunstan

"The accused was altering [the] contents of devices in her home at the same time police were looking for them as evidence," Dr Rogers says.

She then moves to another factory reset which Ms Patterson told the court she performed remotely on the night after the search "to see what happened". Ms Patterson told the court it was a "really stupid" thing to do.

The prosecutor notes to the jury this occurred after the accused knew police were in possession of the phone.

 

[Monstradamus]

I think they meant 'while searching the house' - nonetheless, these factory resets are very damning, IMO

Not the actions of an innocent person with nothing to hide.

 

[drsleuth]

4m ago01.54 BST
Patterson’s mobile phones

Rogers turns to evidence about Patterson’s mobile phones.

She says Patterson had a change in handset at the beginning of February. She continued to use this phone – Phone A – until after the lunch.

“This is what the prosecution says is the accused’s usual mobile phone,” Rogers says.

She says Phone A was still in use up to and while police were searching Patterson’s house on 5 August 2023.

Rogers reminds the jury the agreed fact that at an unknown time between 12.01pm and 1.45pm on this day Patterson’s original phone number – previously used for Phone A – “lost connection with the network”.

Rogers says this could be due to:

A. The sim card being removed

B. The battery being removed without the handset being off

C. The handset being damaged

Rogers says for any of these three things to occur someone – “and we say the accused” – must have been handling the mobile phone.

She reminds the jury that to this day police have never located Phone A.

Erin Patterson mushroom trial day 33 – as it happened

This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

 

[MrJ]

Key Event
Just now
Prosecution says 'lies' about phones constitutes more incriminating conduct

By Joseph Dunstan

Dr Rogers tells the jury that Ms Patterson "lied" about her phone number when police asked her for it in an interview and fed them a "dummy phone' instead of her usual one.

"All of this conduct ... was designed to frustrate the police investigation of this matter. It was all done so that the police would never see the contents of the accused's real mobile phone," Dr Rogers says.

"The only reasonable explanation for engaging in all of this deceptive conduct is that she knew the information on Phone A, her usual mobile phone, would implicate her in the deliberate poisoning of the lunch guests.

"This is another example of incriminating conduct."

 

[MrJ]

1m ago
Prosecution tells jurors to 'be wary' of possible defence argument on digital evidence

By Joseph Dunstan

The prosecutor tells jurors it's possible the defence will suggest there should have been more computer evidence in the prosecution's case.

"The fact is, investigators were not able to check the accused's main device, the one she held in her hand every day ... because, we say, of what she deliberately did," Dr Rogers says.

She urges them to "be wary" of any argument from the defence along these lines, explaining that she's including this in her address because there's no right-of-reply speech for the prosecution after the defence completes its closing address.

"We just have one go at the cherry, or whatever the phrase is," Dr Rogers says.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

I think they meant 'while searching the house' - nonetheless, these factory resets are very damning, IMO

They can't be seen any other way and the jury have been told about the resets a couple of times now and the significance can't be lost on them.

When the defence get their turn, all Mandy can really do now is take up as much time as he possibly can, hoping the impact of the damming evidence is lost or at least watered down with the passage of time.

 

[drsleuth]

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

10:45

Patterson dumped dehydrator at tip because she knew it was 'incriminating', jury hears​

Crown prosecutor Dr Nanette Rogers (left) has continued giving her closing address to the jury.
Dr Rogers is still talking about Patterson's alleged 'fourth deception' and how the accused killer dumped her dehydrator at the Koonwarra Transfer Station tip shortly after getting out of hospital on August 2.
The prosecution suggested Patterson dumping the dehydrator just a few months after buying the appliance amounted to 'incriminating conduct'.
Dr Rogers claimed Patterson dumped the dehydrator because she knew she used it to 'prepare the deadly meal and wanted to hide the evidence'.
Dr Rogers said this was not 'wild panic' and asked the jury to completely reject the defence's explanation it was.
The prosecution also said Patterson's claims about Simon's accusations where he asked her whether the dehydrator was the one which 'poisoned my parents' is 'nonsense'.
Dr Rogers said Simon had denied that allegation during the trial.
Dr Rogers argued the only explanation for dumping the dehydrator was because she had dehydrated death caps in it.
'Why hide it?' Dr Rogers asked.
'Because she knew it was incriminating… she tried to make it disappear.'
Dr Rogers said it was only because police found a bank record for the tip that anyone found the dehydrator.
The jury was reminded that Patterson said 'blankly' during her police interview on August 5 she knew nothing about owning a dehydrator.


10:53

Questions over what phone Patterson handed in​

Dr Rogers also told the jury Patterson, who is today wearing a pink shirt, deliberately dumped her phone, known through the trial as 'Phone A'.
The prosecutor said phone data records indicated Phone A was used during the police search on August 5 but the device has never been found.
Dr Rogers said Patterson also used Phone A while at hospital on July 31 and again the next day.
The jury was shown a CCTV still image which depicted Patterson at Leongatha Hospital carrying Phone A in a pink case.
Dr Rogers said Phone A was her primary device leading up to the lunch.
The jury heard when police requested Patterson hand over her phone they expected her usual phone but instead they were handed a 'dummy phone' known as 'Phone B'.


10:58

Phone B was 'set up to trick police', court hears​

Dr Rogers argued Patterson (pictured) hadn't lost Phone A and had it on her during the police search.
'To this day police have never been able to recover phone A,' Dr Rogers said.
'Phone B – the dummy phone – was what police were provided.'
Dr Rogers said Phone B was a 'dummy phone' set up deliberately 'to trick police' and the device 'contained nothing'.
'Its contents were wiped,' Dr Rogers said.
Phone B was wiped just after 11am on August 2 which was the day after Patterson left hospital and just before she dumped the dehydrator.
On August 3, SIM card 835 connected to Phone B.
On August 5, at 1.20pm, Phone B was wiped locally by Patterson.
'This was during the execution of the search warrant,' Dr Rogers said.
Dr Rogers told the jury the phone had been wiped by someone holding the phone and urged them to accept the times indicated by police.
Dr Rogers said Patterson remotely factory reset the phone again after it was seized as evidence.

 

[drsleuth]

1m ago11.04 AEST

Patterson gave police 'dummy phone' and 'lied about her phone number', Rogers says​

Rogers reminds the jury about the evidence about four factory resets conducted on Phone B.

She says Phone B, which Patterson handed to police, was a “dummy phone”, with the sim card only inserted into it two days before police searched her home

“This was not her usual phone number,” she says.

“We say she lied about her phone number in the police interview”

Rogers says the multiple factory resets, handing over a “dummy” phone and claiming she had a different phone number was “designed to frustrate the police investigation of this matter”.

“It was all done so police would never see the contents of the accused’s mobile phone,” she says.

Rogers says the only reasonable explanation for this deceptive content is that Patterson knew the contents on phone A would implicate her in the deaths of the lunch guess.

“This is another example of incriminating conduct,” Rogers says.

Erin Patterson mushroom trial day 33 – as it happened

This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

 

[MsMarple]

I really like this concept of incriminating conduct.

 

[Kemug]

I wonder how many of the people who have had to face these bitter winter mornings will be jetting off soon for a week of recovery on a tropical island! But not Erin, I hope and pray.

 

[Detechtive]

I wonder how many of the people who have had to face these bitter winter mornings will be jetting off soon for a week of recovery on a tropical island! But not Erin, I hope and pray.

I suspect Ms Patterson may be getting a striped suntan. IMO

 

[Detechtive]

'Dummy phone used to trick police'​

Dr Rogers then turned to Phone B, the “dummy phone”.
She reminded the jury Phone B was the device Erin handed to police on August 5.
“The dummy phone was set up deliberately by the accused to trick the police,” she said, adding this was to hide the contents of her usual phone.
But Dr Rogers said police “found nothing” on Phone B because it had been factory reset multiple times, including on August 5 and August 6.
“Its contents were wiped,” she said.
Dr Rogers also told the jury the SIM card in Phone B ending in 835 was not her usual phone number, telling the jury to reject Erin’s claim she was setting up a new phone that week.
“It was not a phone or a phone number that the accused could truthfully claim she was using as her phone when she handed it over to police,” she said.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/the-mushroom-cook/erin-patterson-trial-live-closing-addresses-continue-in-mushroom-cook-case/live-coverage/2d6e483591ad308c611f94b4f9620a47