Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #15 *Arrest*

[Smelly Squirrel]

Without sounding combatative, is there any evidence other than forum speculation that she is actually a narcissist?

Before coming on this forum and as an atheist, I've spent many years of my life talking with theists and also conspiracy theorists. One mistake they regularly make is thinking that because they can come up with an answer, that it is a good one. This is most obvious with conspiracy theorists. There was a recent flat earth experiment where they went and experienced the 24-hr sun, of course the flat earthers just dismissed it with claims of shilling and fakery and moved on.

We are all capable of this way of thinking in obviously less-extreme ways, when we have a conclusion that is firmly held. If something comes along that challenges something that we deeply believe, we scratch around for a possible answer. I'm 100% that the Turin shroud is a fake, but once in a while a fact will come out that I can't easily rebut. I then accept a less convincing answer because regardless, it isn't going to mean the shroud is real.

This is what I think people are doing with a couple of the key aspects of this case, and I'm not sure they quite realise it. They are so certain of her guilt that they can't see that saying murderers don't think about what happens afterwards isn't a very convincing answer, and nor is the idea she was filled with such hatred over what is a normal family dispute that she wanted these people dead at great cost to herself.

For me and some others, the evidence against EP isn't that strong and unexplainable by other ways that I can discount what the defence called anti-motives.

This isn't me saying I think she is definitely or probably innocent, I don't, but if I was a juror I certainly wouldn't be going in certain I'd be able to get over reasonable doubt.

After having just asked for evidence other than speculation that EP is a narcissist, thank you for speculatively psychoanalyzing people who believe she is guilty.

You are also doing what Mandy warned against, deciding what EP would do in some circumstance, when you talk about her planning for the aftermath.

But the answer to your doubt is easy -- she has shown she is bad at hiding crime. A good example is she disposed of the dehydrator on camera using her identity. She may or may not be smart otherwise, but she is not crime smart.

And that question doesn't even matter, because the fact is no state of mind of hers has to be proven other than her conscious intent to kill. And there is plenty of convincing evidence she did intend to kill her guests that day. That's the only conclusion for just these four facts alone:

-She visited a location where DCs were spotted the same day she bought the dehydrator. What a coincidence!
-It was her foraged mushrooms that caused the deaths. She did not buy DC mushrooms at a Woolworth's or at an Asian grocer as she had suggested (and racist much?).
-She powdered the foraged mushrooms and put them in the BW and told no one. There is no non-nefarious reason to do so.
-She ate different ingredients than her guests did. She and her children did not get poisoned from any of the food they ate from that lunch. There is no reason she would not be the slightest poisoned if she even only ate 1/10 of a DC BW, other than she did not eat what they ate. It's a plain and obvious fact.

There are plenty more reasons that point to her guilt besides the above, but those are enough. There is nothing in evidence exculpatory that overcomes the above. No need to psychoanalyze her nor us lowly but charming trial watchers.

 

[MrJ]

All this motive discussion is a little tiresome if I'm being honest, no disrespect but the last thing I'll say about this. If she is found guilty, I don't think we'll ever know why she did it. Sometimes rage is a common motive for this sort of thing. But humans are complex and weird and I have no doubt her motive would also be complex and weird. And that's really it.

At any rate, finally judge instructions happen tomorrow.

 

[LinasK]

All this motive discussion is a little tiresome if I'm being honest, no disrespect but the last thing I'll say about this. If she is found guilty, I don't think we'll ever know why she did it. Sometimes rage is a common motive for this sort of thing. But humans are complex and weird and I have no doubt her motive would also be complex and weird. And that's really it.

At any rate, finally judge instructions happen tomorrow.

So no court today?

 

[Serononin]

People might be interested in some general discussions about 'reasonable doubt', since we're on a break from courtroom proceedings. These are from the English courts but as far as I know the principles are the same. The Vicky Pryce case 12 years ago caused a flurry of articles about whether the jury's failure to grasp the concept spelled the beginning of the end for the jury system.

The standard of proof in criminal trials: Peter Hitchens is right, and Lord Goddard was wrong.

There was a rather strange report by Martin Beckford in this week’s The Mail on Sunday that judges have been told to stop using the phrase “beyond reasonable doubt” in directing juries on the…

barristerblogger.com

Vicky Pryce faces retrial after jury 'fails to grasp basics'

Judge dismisses jury in case of Chris Huhne's ex-wife, saying panel suffered 'fundamental deficits in understanding'

www.theguardian.com

The Pryce of a jury's failure

Joshua Rozenberg: Questions asked by those entrusted with reaching a verdict on Vicky Pryce push us towards a disturbing inquisition of our own

www.theguardian.com

The phrase "a reasonable doubt is a doubt which is reasonable" has lived rent-free in my head ever since that trial

 

[MrJ]

So no court today?

No. The jury gets the day off today and then tomorrow is when it all happens

 

[Megnut]

It was late May 2022 when Simon fell ill from a mysterious illness. He was in hospital for a month before being moved to rehab. He had to have several operations on his small intestine, was also placed in an induced coma, and his parents said their final farewells to him twice. Somehow he pulled through. On July 7 he put out a call to the local Facebook group from rehab, asking if anyone could recommend a good local physiotherapist, to help him regain his strength. I don't know how long that might have taken, but surely more than a week or two. It's quite likely IMO that it would take at least until September (about 6 weeks) to regain his strength. But I'm no expert. Still, by September some of us are beginning to plan Xmas holidays, thinking about what to buy people as Xmas presents, etc. The year is beginning its downhill run. On 28th April the next year, ie 6 - 7 months later, the Defence alleges that Erin picked Deathcap mushrooms at Loch, and also purchased a dehydrator.
The point I am (somewhat laboriously!) trying to make, is that although Erin was not charged with poisoning Simon at the time, LE may have had suspicions, and may have even begun to investigate and put together a case. There really wasn't all that much time between Simon's mystery illness, the mushroom picking, the buying of the dehydrator and the poisoning event on July 29. We may yet see her charged with poisoning Simon. IMO

Have I got this right? There's an allegation that EP may have poisoned SP, but regardless, he really was hospitalized, spent time in a coma, had surgeries on his colon...

And EP is complaining about how active or not active SP is with the children?

Wow, her.

JMO

 

[Yh5r]

Have I got this right? There's an allegation that EP may have poisoned SP, but regardless, he really was hospitalized, spent time in a coma, had surgeries on his colon...

And EP is complaining about how active or not active SP is with the children?

Wow, her.

JMO

Yes that's right, she complained that he slept a lot on the weekends too. Hmm maybe after 6 weeks in hospital and on his death bed (his family was called to say their good byes twice) the previous year, he was still recovering!
Even if she had no part in his mystery illness, she should have more understanding of his healing journey and should have been more patient with him IMO

 

[Eloise]

Yes that's right, she complained that he slept a lot on the weekends too. Hmm maybe after 6 weeks in hospital and on his death bed (his family was called to say their good byes twice) the previous year, he was still recovering!
Even if she had no part in his mystery illness, she should have more understanding of his healing journey and should have been more patient with him IMO

I'm no lawyer but from my observations only and IMO, I think Simon could probably claim parental alienation, which is not looked upon kindly by the court in terms of access to children (it's not a crime). https://www.familylawyersdw.com.au/taking-parental-alienation-to-court-how-to-prove-it/

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Evil is unspectacular and always human,
And shares our bed and eats at our own table.
W.H. Auden

 

[BreakingNews]

I just hope if she is found not guilty that she is swiftly arrested for Simon’s 3 mysterious ailments.

MOO

That can only happen if there is new and compelling evidence. The charge has been dropped by the DPP

 

[MrJ]

At the end of this trial the jurors and Justice Beale need an all expenses paid trip

 

[BreakingNews]

Regardless of the outcome of the verdict, she did cause the death of 3 people with her cooking!
If foraged, it’s highly unethical not to let lunch guests know about the fact that the meal contains foraged mushrooms so that they can decide for themselves whether they want to take the risk.

I respectfully disagree. This is a rural area. If you grew your own beans or potatoes, as a country person I would not think to mention that. And I would not expect someone cooking for me to disclose anything like that to me.

 

[JBowie]

That can only happen if there is new and compelling evidence. The charge has been dropped by the DPP

It depends on whether or not the prosecution dropped those charges with or without prejudice. If the latter, then the charges can be relaid and trial scheduled.

 

[BreakingNews]

It depends on whether or not the prosecution dropped those charges with or without prejudice. If the latter, then the charges can be relaid and trial scheduled.

Thanks. I didn't know they could do that. However if she was found not guilty of murdering 3 people, then I think it would be difficult to find her guilty of attempted murder of Simon.

 

[Deleted member 194006]

I respectfully disagree. This is a rural area. If you grew your own beans or potatoes, as a country person I would not think to mention that. And I would not expect someone cooking for me to disclose anything like that to me.

I don’t think you can compare foraged mushrooms to beans and other vegetables. They have the ability to be quite deadly (as we have seen) in comparison to common vegetables grown in gardens. Many people would feel uncomfortable eating mushrooms foraged by others, and I would expect to be told if a dish I was eating contained them so that I could make an informed choice.

 

[katydid23]

I respectfully disagree. This is a rural area. If you grew your own beans or potatoes, as a country person I would not think to mention that. And I would not expect someone cooking for me to disclose anything like that to me.

If you grow your own beans and potatoes, there is zero chance they would contain lethal toxins if you served them to your guests.

If you pick wild mushrooms, you found growing UNDER AN OAK TREE , there is a strong possibility they could be lethal. IMO

 

[Deleted member 363451]

I respectfully disagree. This is a rural area. If you grew your own beans or potatoes, as a country person I would not think to mention that. And I would not expect someone cooking for me to disclose anything like that to me.

It's not the same. It's strange that she didn't mention that there were mushrooms in the dish that she'd foraged, but then everything is strange about this case.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

I don’t think you can compare foraged mushrooms to beans and other vegetables. They have the ability to be quite deadly (as we have seen) in comparison to common vegetables grown in gardens. Many people would feel uncomfortable eating mushrooms foraged by others, and I would expect to be told if a dish I was eating contained them so that I could make an informed choice.

Exactly.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

DBM

 

[al66pine]

Not Trying to be a Smart Aleck, but....

I don’t think you can compare foraged mushrooms to beans and other vegetables. They have the ability to be quite deadly (as we have seen) in comparison to common vegetables grown in gardens. Many people would feel uncomfortable eating mushrooms foraged by others, and I would expect to be told if a dish I was eating contained them so that I could make an informed choice

@Qwertzy2008 bbm​

In the context of a private (non-commercial, non-restaurant) meal hosted at home of a relative by marriage, if a guest who wants/expects to "make an informed choice" about whether "to consume foraged mushrooms, should that guest explicitly ask the host(ess) whether mushrooms were ”foraged.” ??? IDK.

And if host(ess) says
--- Yes, mushrooms from XYZ Market were labelled as “foraged” then…???
--- Yes, mushrooms from XYZ Market were labelled as “grown at Diddly Squat Farm,” owned by Jeremy Clarkson/Top Gear/BBC,* then …???
Or
--- Yes, I foraged these mushrooms myself, then…???
then guest says, Sorry, I forgot I was supposed to have meal w. someone else??

If "people would feel uncomfortable eating mushrooms foraged by others" should they ask host(ess) whether mushrooms were "foraged"? IDK.

May depend on specific circumstances. imo.

___________________________________________
* Googled
"Jeremy Clarkson/Top Gear BBC"