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

[drsleuth]

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

11.18am

The phone that was never recovered by police​

By​

Erin Patterson took a series of deliberate steps to conceal her mobile phone from police, prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, has told the jury in her closing address.

Rogers said Patterson’s primary phone number was the one referred to through the trial as phone A, a Samsung galaxy handset.

“The phone records indicate that she continued to use this phone with this phone number right through February 2023 up to the lunch and after the lunch as well,” Rogers said.

This is the phone that the prosecution claims was Patterson’s usual mobile phone and the one she used every day to contact people and use data in the first half of 2023, the time before the July 29, 2023 lunch, and in hospital on July 31 and August 1, 2023.

Rogers said that when police asked Patterson to hand over her phone on August 5, 2023, officers expected her to provide her usual mobile phone.

“You should reject any suggestion by [defence barrister Colin] Mandy that [Patterson] had changed her phone over by that point because the phone records indicate that the … phone was still being used [up until the time of the warrant on August 5, 2023],” the prosecutor told the jury.

About five minutes after the police had began executing the search warrant, phone records showed Patterson was using the SIM card ending with the numbers 783 in her usual mobile phone, including to receive text messages.

“The phone records indicate that at an unknown time between 12.01pm and 1.45pm on August 5, 2023, the service number ending in 783 using a Samsung Galaxy a23 handset ... lost connection with the network,” Rogers said.

This could be due to the SIM card being removed, the battery being removed without turning the handset off, or the battery being damaged.

“For any of those three things to occur someone – and we suggest the accused – must have been handling phone A between 12.01pm and 1.45pm in the middle of the search warrant. It certainly wasn’t sitting idly by in a window sill,” Rogers said.

She said that 783 number next connected again to the network at 1.44am on August 6, 2023, at which time it was used in a Nokia smartphone.

“To this day police have never been able to recover phone A, even after executing another search warrant on November 2, 2023 specifically targeting that phone,” Rogers told the jury.

As Rogers speaks to the jury, Erin Patterson is seated in the dock wearing a pink buttoned shirt and looking down and taking notes.

 

[Gavel Rash]

It’s telling, that in the entire time post lunch events, Erin never showed dismay or surprise or fear or concern at all when the idea of Death Caps was ever raised. Her instinct was to avoid any contact with those affected to the point where she showed nil regard to how they were faring, nor any remorse that the luncheon had made anyone ill. It’s almost like she knew there were death caps in the meal.

 

[drsleuth]

4m ago11.24 AEST

Accused deliberately sought out death caps, prosecutor says​

Rogers says Patterson deliberately sought out death cap mushrooms.

“She knew exactly what she was looking for and she targeted her search accordingly,” she says.

Rogers says the defence will probably argue that Patterson had a good relationship with her lunch guests. She reminds the jury that they do not need to know why someone did something to know that they did it.

Rogers tells the jury not to become distracted by the issue of a lack of motive.

“The question is not why she did this. The question you have to determine is has the prosecution determined, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused did this deliberately?,” she says.

Erin Patterson mushroom trial day 33 – as it happened

This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

 

[MrJ]

Just now
The hearing's resumed after a brief break.

By Joseph Dunstan

Earlier, Dr Rogers told the jury that to accept the defence argument of a foraging accident, they would have to take Erin Patterson "at her word", because all of the evidence supporting a foraging habit "comes from her own mouth".

"For reasons I'll get to a little later, I suggest you simply cannot do that," the prosecutor told the jury.

Now, the prosecutor briefly returns to this, saying Ms Patterson is "not a credible witness" and that's why they should reject her evidence on this matter.

BBM I wonder how the defence will tackle this

 

[drsleuth]

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

“For any of those three things to occur someone – and we suggest the accused – must have been handling phone A between 12.01pm and 1.45pm in the middle of the search warrant. It certainly wasn’t sitting idly by in a window sill,” Rogers said.

She said that 783 number next connected again to the network at 1.44am on August 6, 2023, at which time it was used in a Nokia smartphone.

BBM : Certainly not Dr Rogers.

 

[al66pine]

I've heard that after today Erin Patterson has sacked her defence.

She's recruited Sir Bob Massingbird...

@ MaxDecimus13
Not familar w the name, Sir Bob Massingbird.

Glad I was curious enough to do a quick search.
Time to (re)stream some old episodes of Blackadder.

Fwiw: Find - IMDb

Now, back to the trial.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

BBM I wonder how the defence will tackle this

Hard to see where Mandy can go from here. He can hardly launch an attack on Rogers. Equally, how can he defend Patterson against what is a barrage of evidence, not opinion.

 

[Lisa4]

It’s telling, that in the entire time post lunch events, Erin never showed dismay or surprise or fear or concern at all when the idea of Death Caps was ever raised. Her instinct was to avoid any contact with those affected to the point where she showed nil regard to how they were faring, nor any remorse that the luncheon had made anyone ill. It’s almost like she knew there were death caps in the meal.

Oh but she did. For herself when deathcaps were flagged the very first time. IMO

 

[drsleuth]

11.32am

The ‘dummy phone’ that was reset and wiped​

By​

The handset Erin Patterson handed over to police on August 5, 2023, was phone B, prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, told the jury, as she argued the handset was a “dummy phone” set up by the accused woman to conceal the contents of her usual mobile phone.

Rogers said police found nothing on the device, as it had been factory reset and wiped a number of times, as per the evidence of digital forensic officer Shamen Fox-Henry.

About 1.20pm on August 5, 2023 – in the days after the lunch – phone B was wiped by Patterson during the execution of the search warrant, the prosecutor said.

“Unbeknownst to police, the accused was altering the contents of devices in her home at the same time as police were looking for them for evidence,” she said.

The following day – August 6, 2023 – phone B was wiped again remotely, Rogers said. By this stage, police had already seized that mobile phone and it was in their possession.

“[The accused] knew full well it had been seized as possible evidence,” Rogers said.

From August 3, 2023, phone B contained a SIM card with a number ending 835. Rogers told the jury phone records showed the handset was connected 2½ weeks before the lunch and was only used for data, except for three phone calls Patterson made about 2pm on August 5, 2023, when police allowed her to make arrangements for her children during the warrant.

“The 835 phone number which was in phone B was not the accused’s usual mobile phone number. It was not a phone or phone number that the accused could truthfully claim she was using as her phone when she handed it over to police,” Rogers told the jury.

She said that in the early hours of August 6, 2023 – the day after the police search of Patterson’s Leongatha home – the 783 SIM card, which had been removed from phone A, was connected to a different handset, a Nokia. That phone was never recovered by police.

“It is quite clear that the 783 number, we say, was the accused’s mobile phone number,” Rogers said.

“It was recorded in her medical documentation in hospital. It was the phone number she used to make phone calls and send text messages throughout the relevant period ... it is the phone number she was using when she was sitting in the Leongatha urgent care centre.”

Rogers said that despite giving police the 835 number during her interview on August 5, 2023, it had only been connected for a few weeks.

“She continued using this 783 mobile phone number even after the police interview concluded on August 5, 2023,” the prosecutor told the jury.

“All of this conduct ... was designed to frustrate the police investigation of this matter. It was all done so the police would never see the contents of the accused’s real mobile phone.”

The only reasonable explanation, Rogers said, was that Patterson knew that the information on phone A would implicate her in a deliberate poisoning of her lunch guests.

“This is another example of incriminating conduct,” she told the jury.

The evidence that could have potentially been on that phone, Rogers said, included information about Patterson’s possible visits to Loch and Outtrim. The prosecution alleges Patterson visited those areas looking for death cap mushrooms.

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

 

[Lisa4]

Now, the prosecutor briefly returns to this, saying Ms Patterson is "not a credible witness" and that's why they should reject her evidence on this matter.

I wonder how the defence will tackle this

All they really have is that she had a very drawn-out panic attack that lasted over many days...

 

[MrJ]

Key Event
1m ago
'Decline' in relationship between accused and estranged husband was clear, prosecutor says

By Joseph Dunstan

Dr Rogers tells the jury that perhaps "on the surface" it appeared Ms Patterson had a good relationship with her in-laws.

But the prosecutor says evidence has shown it was not always "harmonious" and Don and Gail Patterson were "dragged, unwillingly" into a financial dispute between Erin and Simon.

"Child support became a significant source of tension between the accused and Simon Patterson," she says.

The prosecutor tells the jury lots of people could see the "decline" in the relationship between Erin and her estranged husband, including their son.

"The accused even told [child protection worker] Katrina Cripps that her relationship with her in-laws had changed recently and she felt isolated from them," she says.

"And she said in evidence to you that she was hurt by this."

 

[Detechtive]

All they really have is that she had a very drawn-out panic attack that lasted over many days...

Many months actually

 

[Deleted member 363451]

4m ago11.24 AEST

Accused deliberately sought out death caps, prosecutor says​

Rogers says Patterson deliberately sought out death cap mushrooms.

“She knew exactly what she was looking for and she targeted her search accordingly,” she says.

Rogers says the defence will probably argue that Patterson had a good relationship with her lunch guests. She reminds the jury that they do not need to know why someone did something to know that they did it.

Rogers tells the jury not to become distracted by the issue of a lack of motive.

“The question is not why she did this. The question you have to determine is has the prosecution determined, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused did this deliberately?,” she says.

Erin Patterson mushroom trial day 33 – as it happened

This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

Rogers tells the jury not to become distracted by the issue of a lack of motive.

“The question is not why she did this. The question you have to determine is has the prosecution determined, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused did this deliberately?,” she says.

 

[Detechtive]

Key Event
1m ago
'Decline' in relationship between accused and estranged husband was clear, prosecutor says

By Joseph Dunstan

Dr Rogers tells the jury that perhaps "on the surface" it appeared Ms Patterson had a good relationship with her in-laws.

But the prosecutor says evidence has shown it was not always "harmonious" and Don and Gail Patterson were "dragged, unwillingly" into a financial dispute between Erin and Simon.

"Child support became a significant source of tension between the accused and Simon Patterson," she says.

The prosecutor tells the jury lots of people could see the "decline" in the relationship between Erin and her estranged husband, including their son.

"The accused even told [child protection worker] Katrina Cripps that her relationship with her in-laws had changed recently and she felt isolated from them," she says.

"And she said in evidence to you that she was hurt by this."

They’re not proposing a motive because it can be too easily dismissed imo, but they are actually proposing a motive with these inferences

 

[Cliff Hardy]

Key Event
1m ago
'Decline' in relationship between accused and estranged husband was clear, prosecutor says

By Joseph Dunstan

Dr Rogers tells the jury that perhaps "on the surface" it appeared Ms Patterson had a good relationship with her in-laws.

But the prosecutor says evidence has shown it was not always "harmonious" and Don and Gail Patterson were "dragged, unwillingly" into a financial dispute between Erin and Simon.

"Child support became a significant source of tension between the accused and Simon Patterson," she says.

The prosecutor tells the jury lots of people could see the "decline" in the relationship between Erin and her estranged husband, including their son.

"The accused even told [child protection worker] Katrina Cripps that her relationship with her in-laws had changed recently and she felt isolated from them," she says.

"And she said in evidence to you that she was hurt by this."

Rogers covering all bases by attempting to provide motive, even though she has already told the jury they don't need one to find Patterson guilty.

Rogers is dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's here.

 

[browneyes]

I’m just catching up, but the prosecution is knocking it out of the park. Love how she explained the phone situation.

 

[drsleuth]

11:34

Patterson 'not a credible witness'​

Dr Rogers (left) told the jury Patterson was not a 'credible witness' and her claims she accidentally put death caps in the Wellingtons should be rejected
The prosecutor told the jury just before the short break that the evidence indicating Patterson had an interest in foraging had only come from the accused herself.
'We say you would not accept her account of this because she is not a credible witness,' Dr Rogers said.
Justice Christopher Beale also told the jury he would be giving them more breaks during closings so they can 'walk around a bit'.

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

 

[Deleted member 363451]

They’re not proposing a motive because it can be too easily dismissed imo, but they are actually proposing a motive with these inferences

 

[MrJ]

2m ago
Accused was 'duplicitous' in dealings with in-laws, prosecutor alleges

By Joseph Dunstan

Dr Rogers tells the jury the evidence before them shows Ms Patterson was feeling a "build-up of resentment and anger" towards her in-laws in the months before the lunch.

She references messages Ms Patterson sent to her Facebook friends, telling them the Patterson family was demanding.

“She was mocking them and their religious beliefs, despite attending church with them,” Dr Rogers says.

"The accused was leading a duplicitous life when it came to the Pattersons," Dr Rogers says.

"She presented one side, while expressing contrary beliefs to others."

She also notes the messages sent to Facebook friends where Ms Patterson said "f*** 'em" while expressing frustration about her in-laws.

 

[Warshawski]

If we say that Erin is guilty, there are 2 main theories: that she intended to kill them all or that she didn't intend for them all to die and that some would only get sick.

The reality is that with what we can ascertain about Erin from the evidence both of these propositions contain problems that have to be accounted for.

1) Erin was very clever and thorough, and would surely have done her research about DC.

2) Erin would have surely known that she couldn't explain away the sudden mysterious deaths of 4/5 people.

It goes without saying that if guilty either could be true. I'm only assessing what I think is more likely.

I find number 2 much more problematic. Until Erin took the stand, I would probably have said it didn't meet the requirement of reasonable doubt because of reasons around this. There is a serious lack of motive to murder these specific 4 people IMO. Then you factor in that she panicked afterwards and tried to dispose of evidence in a way that seems unlikely with a planned-out murder.

With number 1 we actually have good evidence that Erin isn't necessarily always extremely thorough. She mistakenly thought the Enrich clinic did gastric-band. If she's guilty, she's had months to create this alternative scenario and make it water-tight. She didn't even look at the website to check if it really did.

My running theory is that from the searches in 2022, Erin had a knowledge of DC and made the assumption that they were 10-30% lethal based on the headline information. She was then on inaturalist one day and noticed that they were available and saw it as an opportunity. Throughout this period, she never questioned the original assumption.

I agree with you that Erin had months to plan her Lunch, and I think she did it extremely thoroughly. She had everything set to wipe out these people who dared to seperate themselves from her control imo.

I think Erin thought that they would head off to their respective homes where quite possibly they would die overnight. … and by the time they were located and investigations began, the toxins will no longer have been traceable in their systems.
So she didn’t have to put anything like her ‘pre-planning’ into her ‘post-planning’.

Unfortunately (for her) Simon threw a spanner in the works by declining the invitation to attend. Note, I think he was a bit suspicious by that stage of his illness being the result of her food, but I don’t believe he considered for a moment that she would harm his Parents or his Aunt & Uncle.
Then he stuffed it all up again by taking his parents to hospital, and then checking on his Aunt & Uncle, and taking them to hospital.

Suddenly things were different to how EP expected / planned, and in going into damage control, she missed the finer details in her behaviour that made things initially appear ‘suss’.
I think a lot of ‘lies’ under Cross were things she’s made up whilst in remand in an attempt to ‘cover up’, because her arrogance is such that she believes she infallible.

I feel so terribly sad & concerned for her children as they have been going through this at such vulnerable ages, and for that reason I really wish I could judge EP as not guilty … however I can’t find a thing to even put a doubt in my mind.

MOO