Erin Patterson trial: Judge begins charge to mushroom murder jury
Jurors in the triple-murder trial of alleged death cap poisoner Erin Patterson have been given a hint as to the hearing’s progress.
A large crowd gathered outside court on Tuesday to attend the case. Picture: NewsWire / Nadir Kinani
Justice Beale began his closing remarks on Tuesday, setting out that he would direct the jury on the principles of law and summarise the evidence and arguments on the issues they would need to judge.
Jurors were each handed a white binder containing an 86-page index of the chronology of the trial.
“I hope it will be of assistance to you in managing the great amount of information you’ve received over the last eight weeks,” the judge said.
Turning to the issues that sit at the heart of the trial, Justice Beale told the 14-person panel they would need to set aside sympathy and focus on whether the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt Ms Patterson was criminally responsible for the deaths.
He said the case had attracted “unprecedented media attention and excited much public comment” but urged jurors to be careful not to let it influence them.
“Any decent person would feel great sympathy for the Wilkinson and Patterson families, but you must guard scrupulously against prejudice,” he said.
Erin Patterson’s defence team includes Colin Mandy SC (left), Bill Doogue (centre) and Sophie Stafford (right). Picture: NewsWire / Nadir Kinani
‘Inconsistencies’ raises in witness statements
The Supreme Court judge has moved on to inconsistent statements, highlighting examples where the prosecution and defence claim witnesses had given various accounts previously that differed to their evidence.
Justice Beale said the defence had asked him to draw attention to five witnesses while the prosecution asked him to address Ms Patterson’s evidence.
He begun with the evidence of Simon Patterson, pointing the jury to a series of questions and answers around two topics — whether he agreed his friendship with Ms Patterson was “strong” up until December 2022 and around his used of the words “serious” and “important” when giving evidence the accused woman allegedly invited him to the lunch.
Justice Beale moved on to evidence from Ian Wilkinson, Dr Chris Webster, Tanya Patterson and Sally Ann Atkinson.
For Ms Patterson, the judge raised eight topics he said the prosecution wanted to highlight.
These were;
1) Whether she had a tendency to pick and eat wild mushrooms;
2) Whether her children were “invited to or free to attend the lunch”;
3) The source of mushrooms that went into the beef wellingtons;
4) How much the accused woman ate of her beef wellington;
5) How much Gail Patterson ate of her beef wellington;
6) When Ms Patterson claimed she started to experience diarrhoea after the lunch;
7) Whether Ms Patterson knew or begun to suspect the lunch was the cause of Don and Gail’s illnesses on the evening of July 30;
8) Whether she knew Don and Gail were in comas by August 1, 2023.
Justice Beale said it was a matter for the jury to determine if a witness had made prior inconsistent statements, but if they did they could use it to assess credibility.
He said inconsistent statements do not necessarily lead to the conclusion a witness was lying and they would have to determine which, if any, statement to believe.
“It’s for you to determine whether or not to draw this conclusion from any inconsistencies you find,” he said.
The Crown’s case has been led by prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC. Picture: NewsWire / Nadir Kinani
Judge addresses hearsay evidence
Justice Beale turned to the topic of hearsay evidence, which he warns jurors must approach with caution.
The judge warned that errors could occur when the statements are said, heard or repeated in court and defence were not given the opportunity to cross examine the maker.
Justice Beale pointed to examples of hearsay evidence, including Simon Patterson’s evidence Heather Wilkinson had remarked to him that Ms Patterson had served herself on a differently-coloured plate to the guests.
The judge also pointed to Ian Wilkinson’s evidence his wife Heather remarked that Ms Patterson had a different coloured plate.
Another example raised was Simon’s evidence his father, Don, said Ms Patterson told the lunch guests she had cancer.
Justice Beale said it was up to the jury to determine if Heather said those things to Simon and Ian and if Don said this to Simon.
“Even if you accept it as truthful, it might not be an accurate reflection of what was heard or said,” he said.
Lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson attended the hearing. Picture: NewsWire / Nadir Kinani
Mushroom jury laughs after mistake
Taking the jury through the evidence in relation to Ms Patterson’s claimed tendency to forage for wild edible mushrooms, Justice Beale erred when discussing what one witness, Laura Muldoon, said the accused woman had told her.
“Dr Muldoon gave evidence she asked Ms Patterson whether she used wild mushrooms in the beef wellington,” the judge said.
“Ms Patterson said she thinks she told Dr Mushroom, ah Muldoon, she had not used wild mushrooms.”
The mistake prompted a hearty laugh in the courtroom from jurors and the public gallery, with Justice Beale commenting “that was deliberate just to check if you were still awake,” before laughing himself.
Prosecutors allege Ms Patterson deliberately spiked the meal with the poisonous mushrooms intending to kill, or at least seriously injure, her guests, while her defence maintains it was a tragic accident.
Last week, jurors in the trial were sent home early on Thursday by Justice Christopher Beale, who advised he would begin his closing address on Tuesday morning.
“It is more important than ever that you have a good weekend,” he said.
“I really want you to come back refreshed on Tuesday.”
Simon’s parents, Don and Gail Patterson, died a day apart in early August 2023. Picture: Supplied
The judge said he had a lot of ground to cover in his remarks, estimating it would take two or three days to deliver.
He said the charge would cover three topics – the relevant legal framework, the issues for jurors to determine and a summary of the evidence and arguments.
In her closing arguments delivered last week, Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC argued the evidence adduced over the previous seven weeks could allow the jury to “safely reject” the theory the lunch was a terrible accident.
“We say there is no reasonable alternative explanation for what happened to the lunch guests other than the accused deliberately sourced death cap mushrooms and deliberately included them in the meal she served them, with an intention to kill them,” Dr Rogers said.
Heather Wilkinson was the first of the lunch guests to die on August 4, while her husband, Ian Wilkinson, survived. Picture: Supplied.
On the other side of the bar table, Ms Patterson’s barrister, Colin Mandy SC, argued the prosecution’s case was built on cherrypicked facts and the jury should accept his client’s account of an accidental poisoning.
“There’s no possible prospect that Erin wanted in those circumstances to destroy her whole world, her whole life. Surely, it’s more likely that her account is true,” he said.
He said Patterson, who spent eight days in the witness box, was not obliged to give evidence in the trial and did not have to prove her own innocence.
"She is no different to any other witness," Justice Beale said.
"You must assess her evidence the same as you assess the evidence of any other witness."
He listed several conclusions for them to take into account about Patterson's evidence.
If they found her evidence was true, or likely to be true, they must find her not guilty of all charges, he said.
It was not enough to "prefer" the prosecution's case to Patterson's evidence, or to choose which they prefer.
Rather, it was up to the prosecution to establish she was guilty, the judge said.
If jurors did not believe Patterson's evidence, they must put it aside and establish if the prosecution had proven she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on their evidence.
The 14 jurors will be balloted down to 12 and sequestered when they begin deliberations.
They must return with a unanimous verdict on all charges.
The trial continues.
www.theage.com.au
