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

[MrJ]

Now we have to wait until Tuesday for more updates... this is torture!

 

[AMJR]

This is my first & possibly my only post (shy), but I wanted to raise this, as I haven’t seen it come up elsewhere…

I think the “she panicked” defence is only plausible in the immediate aftermath, the hours days and weeks following the lunch (if you’re that way inclined, which I’m not) which sparked, according to the defence, her litany of lies. I can see why some people might accept that.

But what is much harder to defend in the “panic” scenario is that she continued to issue a string of lies on the witness stand. She was no longer in panic mode on the stand, she was calmly answering questions put to her, but she seemingly made up obvious lies on the spot while literally on trial for murder - the obvious example being that she was planning gastric bypass surgery at the Enrich clinic, which the prosecution exposed and that has been discussed a lot here. There are other statements she made on the stand that are probable lies, such as her claiming that her bulimia (never heard of before she took the stand) caused her to cram in three quarters of a cake and then puke it up (also never heard of before taking the stand).

I believe the “panic” defence fails when you consider she was still telling outlandish lies right there on the stand - and that’s even without considering the lies about her health and the reason for the gathering told before there was anything to panic about.

 

[Monstradamus]

This is my first & possibly my only post (shy), but I wanted to raise this, as I haven’t seen it come up elsewhere…

I think the “she panicked” defence is only plausible in the immediate aftermath, the hours days and weeks following the lunch (if you’re that way inclined, which I’m not) which sparked, according to the defence, her litany of lies. I can see why some people might accept that.

But what is much harder to defend in the “panic” scenario is that she continued to issue a string of lies on the witness stand. She was no longer in panic mode on the stand, she was calmly answering questions put to her, but she seemingly made up obvious lies on the spot while literally on trial for murder - the obvious example being that she was planning gastric bypass surgery at the Enrich clinic, which the prosecution exposed and that has been discussed a lot here. There are other statements she made on the stand that are probable lies, such as her claiming that her bulimia (never heard of before she took the stand) caused her to cram in three quarters of a cake and then puke it up (also never heard of before taking the stand).

I believe the “panic” defence fails when you consider she was still telling outlandish lies right there on the stand - and that’s even without considering the lies about her health and the reason for the gathering told before there was anything to panic about.

It doesn't usually end well when you tell lies to cover your lies. Conciousness of guilt lies, imo.
She had me at individual BW serves. I have not changed my mind after that.
May justice for the victims and their families be swift.

 

[Megnut]

"Mr Mandy then turns his attention to propositions from the prosecution, which he dubs "convoluted" and "absurd":

• That Erin Patterson would commit murder without any motive"

Erin Patterson was 'unscathed' by cross-examination, jury told — as it happened

Defence barrister Colin Mandy SC is continuing to deliver his closing address to the jury in Ms Patterson's triple-murder trial. Follow the trial as it happened

www.abc.net.au

RSBM

[Firstly, Mr Mandy, the prosecution hasn't suggested there is no motive, they just chose not to detail any specific one]

This whole motive thing is an interesting one.

Let’s just accept for a moment that most people don’t think murdering people is a rational act. So arguing about whether someone has sufficient motive to murder is a bit spurious.

That said I actually started following this trial because I didn’t see why Erin went ahead with the poisoned lunch if the obvious intended victim [SP] had already RSVP’d no show. [if she is guilty of knowing the foraged mushies were DC]

However as the trial has progressed, I have come to see that, through Erin’s eyes, there are plenty of potential motives, including individual ones for each and every one of the people sat around the table. I agree with the prosecution decision not to go down the suggesting motive route, because which ones would they choose? It would just confuse the case. And the revelation of possible motives is largely from Erin’s own testimony or what Mr Mandy has chosen to highlight, so there is a good chance jury members who feel they need a motive will also have seen them uncovered, particularly as they will have seen a fuller version of the evidence than we have gleaned from press reporting.

Personally I think a lot of the driving force behind these murders is that Erin simply wanted to. She thought she could see a way to commit a multiple murder and get away with it, planned it all out, including how to handle the subsequent enquiry [panic] and decided to try it. I’m not even sure that the motives she might perceive against these people was a motivating force.

Afterall this is an unusual murder case. She is able to admit she 'did it' [fed poisonous mushrooms to her guests] and still have the opportunity to get acquitted by claiming it is a horrible accident. For a murderously inclined, intelligent, true crime fan it had to have been tempting to try.

JMOO

And why? Why did she proceed without SP there? Because she knew he would come later. (Perhaps she expected that she could invite him in for dinner with the children.

And he could have the BW she effortfully made for him while the children -- who conveniently don't like mushrooms -- could eat cubed beef, and Erin would sit out, bring that she was overfull on an unknown amount if BW and a outrageous overserve of cake.

Those accidentally pulverized DCs would hit his vulnerable insides rather hard, I'd imagine, little time to summon ambulances for anyone.

JMO

 

[arrogantcat]

I've always said there is a chance that EP is innocent and telling lies to conceal embarrassing truths about herself.

If she is innocent, she clearly invited them to the meal to tell them about health problems and then announced it was cancer. She would have done this because she's been exposed as a pathetic attention-seeking liar. However, she couldn't accept this being out so tried to invent a less-damaging version of it which ended up tying her in knots.

And ironically enough, being a pathetic attention seeking liar who wanted them all to feel sorry for her would be quite exonerating in that context.
Dead people can’t give you sympathy!

 

[303gmf]

So in the absence of a video showing a murderer committing a crime, how does a jury decide whether someone is guilty or not? Evidence, testimony, statements, common sense, all of which can be interpreted differently by different individuals. It's not so black and white.

Also - I am finally caught up on this thread - hard, as I am in the US and always a day behind, but thank you, thank you, thank you to all the posters who post updates from the trial.

I think the Prosecution's closing was stellar overall - though do agree some of the points of ambiguity around whether vomiting could expel toxins and that the meat given to the children could not have been the one from the BWs could have been made more explicit. However, if the jury disbelieves Erin's accounts about vomiting at all and that they ate that meat given her reluctance to bring the children to the hospital, it won't really matter.

I do think the Defense's strongest arguments lie in whether her actions after the fact (which are pretty damning) truly are those of a cold, calculating murderer or just someone who panicked, because that sort of question comes up all the time here at Websleuths - would they have been that stupid to have done/not done X, Y, and Z if they really wanted to get away with murder?

My counterpoint to that question is..."Why would anyone commit murder if they didn't think they were going to get away with it?"

In my opinion and experience of following these cases of premeditated murder, I never think it's stupidity that gets murderers caught - it's arrogance. They truly believe that their carefully (at least in their minds) prepared lies will be believed hook, line, and sinker by "dumb cops" that certainly couldn't be smarter than they are. And if they have any NPD/sociopathic tendencies, it's an inability to anticipate the reactions and actions of people with real emotions, empathy, and caring for others, especially those that they have long discarded and that have outlived their usefulness to them. A few examples of the top of my head:

Patrick Frazee - killed his girlfriend Kelsey Berreth and "Frazee expressed surprise in the media's interest in the case" in conversations with one of his friends. He also said "no body, no crime."

Barry Morphew - rolled up to the staged scene of his wife's mountain bike, shaking his head and said "Lion?", thinking that everyone would buy his story that a mountain lion got his wife, dragged her away, and that would be that, LE shrugs, says ain't that a shame and that's that. (Although still waiting for justice in that one!)

If there was any panic in Erin's actions, it was surprise that death caps were suspected so quickly, how concerned and insistent doctors were about making sure Erin and her children were not going to die, and the lengths that doctors and public health officials were willing to go to ensure that no other people would fall ill and/or die from these mushrooms. She may truly have believed that they would think, "Oh well, it's her problem if she dies. And oh, some old people died from gastro, maybe it was mushrooms, maybe it wasn't, we can't seem to find where they came from, such bad luck, tsk tsk" and that was that. But unfortunately for her, that's not how it works.

Kelsey Berreth’s tragic murder brought me to WS since I’m from nearby it interested, then Suzanne Morphew and evil BM

 

[Eloise]

It doesn't usually end well when you tell lies to cover your lies. Conciousness of guilt lies, imo.
She had me at individual BW serves. I have not changed my mind after that.
May justice for the victims and their families be swift.

You can find recipes for individual beef wellingtons. They're a thing.
Not sure why she didn't use a recipe made for individual ones.

Chef John's Individual Beef Wellingtons

Perfectly cooked filet mignon topped with a rich mushroom pate is wrapped in a crispy pastry crust and served on top of a buttery pastry base for a 1-2 punch that's hard to beat.

www.allrecipes.com

Individual Beef Wellington {+ Step-by-Step Photos}

A British classic made mini! Individual Beef Wellington is the epitome of elegance & indulgence. Make-ahead & freezer instructions provided.

playswellwithbutter.com

https://www.taste.com.au/recipes/individual-beef-wellingtons-3/bd7ab619-e7ef-4885-9322-d07b3c34623b

 

[SilentHill]

You can find recipes for individual beef wellingtons. They're a thing.
Not sure why she didn't use a recipe made for individual ones.

Chef John's Individual Beef Wellingtons

Perfectly cooked filet mignon topped with a rich mushroom pate is wrapped in a crispy pastry crust and served on top of a buttery pastry base for a 1-2 punch that's hard to beat.

www.allrecipes.com

Individual Beef Wellington {+ Step-by-Step Photos}

A British classic made mini! Individual Beef Wellington is the epitome of elegance & indulgence. Make-ahead & freezer instructions provided.

playswellwithbutter.com

https://www.taste.com.au/recipes/individual-beef-wellingtons-3/bd7ab619-e7ef-4885-9322-d07b3c34623b

That second link referring to BW as a "British classic" has got me laughing, I've never had one in my life and in fact I've only ever seen them on Hells Kitchen

 

[Deleted member 363451]

I've always said there is a chance that EP is innocent and telling lies to conceal embarrassing truths about herself.

If she is innocent, she clearly invited them to the meal to tell them about health problems and then announced it was cancer. She would have done this because she's been exposed as a pathetic attention-seeking liar. However, she couldn't accept this being out so tried to invent a less-damaging version of it which ended up tying her in knots.

So you think that she accidentally picked Death Caps?

 

[SouthAussie]

I think that these are the facts that the jury has to work with.

• Made comments to online friends about how she was “done” with her in-laws
• Provided photos to online friends of mushrooms – an expert testifying that they looked like Death Caps
• Changed her kids’ school
• Invited 4 in-laws to lunch, two who were surprised by the never-before invitation
• Invited estranged husband to lunch – he declined
• Cancer “scare” - how to tell the kids?
• Individual beef wellingtons
• Different type of plate for Erin
• Did not disclose using foraged mushrooms
• Balked against her kids and herself being medically tested
• Three lunch attendees died, one almost died and slowly recovered
• Death cap toxin found in dehydrator, duxelle and meat
• Phone A not handed to police
• Presented Phone B as her primary phone
• Reset Phone B multiple times
• Gave a “no comment” police interview
• Sent a statement to the police claiming the mushrooms were a mixture of button mushrooms from a major supermarket chain and dried mushrooms from an Asian grocery store in Melbourne
• Police tech search later found multiple (formerly unprovided) devices at her home
• Phone A never found
• Admitted she lied to police

imo

 

[BreakingNews]

Any evidence for this? Her mother was a noted English lit professor and author.

Catalogue Search | Author: "Scutter, Heather Margaret, 1946-" | Catalogue | National Library of Australia Search Results

catalogue.nla.gov.au

Her Grandmother. I'll look for a link.

 

[BreakingNews]

Somewhere in this thread I believe I did read of an Egyptian connection . . . ?

I've read something about her grandmother being from there

 

[BreakingNews]

Any evidence for this? Her mother was a noted English lit professor and author.

Catalogue Search | Author: "Scutter, Heather Margaret, 1946-" | Catalogue | National Library of Australia Search Results

catalogue.nla.gov.au

Grandmother Egyptian

 

[SouthAussie]

Grandmother Egyptian

I think her maternal grandmother was born in Egypt - but moved to Adelaide, South Australia, prior to 1945.

imo

 

[Eloise]

Grandmother Egyptian

Her maiden name was Keminer, which is Ashkenazi

 

[ch_13]

Grandmother Egyptian

I'm sorry, I'm missing your point. What possible difference could it make if her grandmother was foreign-born?

Erin grew up speaking English. Her mother was a professor of English. For all we know, her grandmother was fluent in English herself.

 

[Jake18]

I think that these are the facts that the jury has to work with.

• Made comments to online friends about how she was “done” with her in-laws
• Provided photos to online friends of mushrooms – an expert testifying that they looked like Death Caps
• Changed her kids’ school
• Invited 4 in-laws to lunch, two who were surprised by the never-before invitation
• Invited estranged husband to lunch – he declined
• Cancer “scare” - how to tell the kids?
• Individual beef wellingtons
• Different type of plate for Erin
• Did not disclose using foraged mushrooms
• Balked against her kids and herself being medically tested
• Three lunch attendees died, one almost died and slowly recovered
• Death cap toxin found in dehydrator, duxelle and meat
• Phone A not handed to police
• Presented Phone B as her primary phone
• Reset Phone B multiple times
• Gave a “no comment” police interview
• Sent a statement to the police claiming the mushrooms were a mixture of button mushrooms from a major supermarket chain and dried mushrooms from an Asian grocery store in Melbourne
• Police tech search later found multiple (formerly unprovided) devices at her home
• Phone A never found
• Admitted she lied to police

imo

It’s the lies I think the judge will need to help the jury with.

She lied so much - the presence of the dehydrator, cancer of the elbow, the foraging, the gastric band procedure.

Anything that potentially exonerates her is also what she says - that she was also unwell (medical staff disagree), that Simon confronted her about the dehydrator and she she panicked (Simon disagrees), there was no different plate (Ian disagrees).

how heavily do the jury need to weight her own assertions, given she has lied so much?

 

[SouthAussie]

It’s the lies I think the judge will need to help the jury with.

She lied so much - the presence of the dehydrator, cancer of the elbow, the foraging, the gastric band procedure.

Anything that potentially exonerates her is also what she says - that she was also unwell (medical staff disagree), that Simon confronted her about the dehydrator and she she panicked (Simon disagrees), there was no different plate (Ian disagrees).

how heavily do the jury need to weight her own assertions, given she has lied so much?

Yes, I posted the things that we (and the jury) know are the truth. Proven facts. I think the jury can, and should, disregard all of the other garbage.

imo

 

[Little Jack]

Presumably on 'silent' mode. Probably not

Did they do a cavity search ???

If so they might have found some corks

 

[Yh5r]

I think that these are the facts that the jury has to work with.

• Made comments to online friends about how she was “done” with her in-laws
• Provided photos to online friends of mushrooms – an expert testifying that they looked like Death Caps
• Changed her kids’ school
• Invited 4 in-laws to lunch, two who were surprised by the never-before invitation
• Invited estranged husband to lunch – he declined
• Cancer “scare” - how to tell the kids?
• Individual beef wellingtons
• Different type of plate for Erin
• Did not disclose using foraged mushrooms
• Balked against her kids and herself being medically tested
• Three lunch attendees died, one almost died and slowly recovered
• Death cap toxin found in dehydrator, duxelle and meat
• Phone A not handed to police
• Presented Phone B as her primary phone
• Reset Phone B multiple times
• Gave a “no comment” police interview
• Sent a statement to the police claiming the mushrooms were a mixture of button mushrooms from a major supermarket chain and dried mushrooms from an Asian grocery store in Melbourne
• Police tech search later found multiple (formerly unprovided) devices at her home
• Phone A never found
• Admitted she lied to police

imo

Great summary. Based on all this it would be very surprising if the jury doesn't unanimously decide on guilt. IMO

I would also add:

"no signs of mushrooms other than button mushrooms in the leftovers yet finding death cap toxins" - this points to another clear lie that Erin cut up the alleged dehydrated mixed mushrooms and added them to the duxelles. It likely proves that there were powdered mushrooms in the mix (likely death caps) which makes no sense unless the intent was to cause ill effects.

- "Asian store was not given as a source immediately but only after further questioning. Erin (who can remember days of the week from dates 2 years ago) couldn't remember which grocer they were from and the actual source was never found. No one else anywhere got mushroom poisoning around the same time"