VERDICT WATCH Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #16 *Arrest*

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #861
I've been wondering if the religious faith of Simon and other family members would be forgiving of EP? I doubt I would be, but know that deeply religious people sometimes forgive, rather than hold any long term hostilities towards others.
Just a discussion point.
 
  • #862
I've been wondering if the religious faith of Simon and other family members would be forgiving of EP? I doubt I would be, but know that deeply religious people sometimes forgive, rather than hold any long term hostilities towards others.
Just a discussion point.
I think for some people, offering forgiveness helps them let go of the pain and hatred. I'm not sure I could, and I hope I'm never in a position to do so. These two links have remarkable examples of someone offering forgiveness. The first is a man whose wife killed their three children (trial starts in January), and the second is a woman who forgave the man who killed her son and served his prison term (it's an interview with both of them).


 
  • #863
People who pick mushrooms come in all shapes and sizes.
At least here in Australia it's just ordinary people. Not super fit people going on a hike.

They pick in paddocks, beside roads and houses, near ovals.
It's not usually something which needs you to be very fit.
 
  • #864
The trial I was on also involved a death. Not a murder case
We were allowed to go home each day.
The case only lasted a day and part of the next day.

On the first day we were taken to a local hotel for lunch.
 
  • #865

Erin Patterson trial: Jurors sent out to deliberate verdict in mushroom murder case​

Two jurors in the triple-murder trial of Erin Patterson have been balloted off as the remaining jurors are sent out to deliberate.

Jurors in the triple-murder trial of Erin Patterson have been sent out to begin their deliberations on a verdict.
The direction, from Justice Christopher Beale, occurred at 1.02pm on Monday just minutes after two jurors were balloted off.

The 14-member panel returned to court following a short break to say their goodbyes to the fellow jurors they’d come to know over the past 10 weeks.

“A very warm thank you to those two people balloted off,” Justice Christopher Beale said ahead of the ballot.

“I don’t know if you’ll feel relieved or frustrated, but rest assured you’ve made a very important contribution to the administration of justice.”

The ballot comes after Justice Beale told jurors that any verdict they reached would have to be unanimous and took the group though the formal process.

He said jurors had hopefully brought their luggage with them as they would be sequestered for the duration of their deliberations.

Erin Patterson told the jury she loved her in-laws and did not poison them intentionally. Picture: NewsWire/ David Crosling

Erin Patterson told the jury she loved her in-laws and did not poison them intentionally. Picture: NewsWire/ David Crosling
The two members balloted off, both men, were led from the court.

The remaining 12 jurors, seven men and five women, were then asked to retire and reach a verdict.

They will be deliberation from Mondays to Saturdays and given a rest day on Sunday.

Earlier Justice Beale said he would take verdicts, if any are reached, between normal court hours of 10.30am and 1pm and from 2.15pm to 4.15pm.

Ms Patterson, 50, is facing trial after pleading not guilty to murdering three of her husband Simon Patterson’s family members and the attempted murder of a fourth.

Simon’s parents, Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson, died in early August, 2023, from multiple organ failure linked to death cap mushroom poisoning.

The case centres around a lunch Ms Patterson hosted on July 29, 2023, at her home in Leongatha, in Victoria’s southeast, where the accused woman served beef wellingtons containing death cap mushrooms.

Prosecutors allege Ms Patterson deliberately sought out and included the deadly fungi intending to kill or at least seriously injure her four guests.

Her defence argues the case is a tragic accident, Ms Patterson also fell ill and she did not want to harm anyone.

Lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson and his daughter Ruth Dubios were present in the packed courtroom. Picture: NewsWire / Diego Fedele

Lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson and his daughter Ruth Dubios were present in the packed courtroom. Picture: NewsWire / Diego Fedele
When the matter returned to court in Morwell on Monday, Justice Beale began by having three jury keepers sworn in to assist jurors over the course of their deliberations.

Justice Beale then turned to his summing up of the evidence and arguments in relation to four alleged lies the prosecution argued should be used to assess Ms Patterson’s credibility.

Those allegedly were that she was “very, very helpful” to the Department of Health, lies about the reason for the lunch, and lies about telling the lunch guests she had cancer and whether she was planning gastric bypass surgery.

Court sketch of Ms Patterson. Picture: NewsWire / Anita Lester

Court sketch of Ms Patterson. Picture: NewsWire / Anita Lester
Justice Beale turned to Ms Patterson’s evidence that she planned to use a possible cancer investigation as cover to receive weight-loss surgery without having to tell her husband’s family.

Giving evidence, Ms Patterson pointed to a September 2023 appointment she had at the Enrich Clinic in Melbourne she said was a pre-assessment for gastric bypass.

Justice Beale told the jury the prosecution had alleged this was the “starkest lie” Ms Patterson told in the witness box after a last-minute investigation found the Enrich Clinic never offered gastric bypass or any other surgery.

Ms Patterson accepted the clinic did not offer this when shown a statement from the practice but said she was “puzzled” because that’s what she thought the appointment was for.

She explained it may have been other weight-loss options such as liposuction, which Enrich did offer until mid-2024.

Justice Beale told the court the defence argued Ms Patterson was “honestly mistaken” when she gave the evidence.

Turning to the four alleged lies, Justice Beale said if jurors found the accused lied about something, they could use that to determine her credibility on other things she said.

“That is not to say just because you find she lied about one matter that she lied about everything else,” he said.

“It is for you to decide what significance to give these alleged lies.”

Justice Beale warned jurors they could not reason that because a person had told a lie about something they must be guilty.

Don and Gail Patterson died a day apart in early August 2023. Picture: Supplied.

Don and Gail Patterson died a day apart in early August 2023. Picture: Supplied.
Heather Wilkinson was the first guess to die on August 4, while her husband Ian Wilkinson recovered following more than a month in hospital. Picture: Supplied.

Heather Wilkinson was the first guess to die on August 4, while her husband Ian Wilkinson recovered following more than a month in hospital. Picture: Supplied.
D-Day for mushroom trial jury

On Friday, Justice Beale told jurors he expected to complete his summing up of the evidence, arguments and legal principles by noon on Monday.

Then, he said, the 14-person panel of Victorians would be reduced to 12 with a random ballot before jurors are asked to retire and begin deliberations.

“I’ll be completing the charge prior to lunchtime on Monday, at which point we’ll have the ballot and away you go so to speak,” he said.

At the start of the trial 10 weeks ago, jurors were told they would be sequestered for the duration of their deliberations.

The trial continues.


I don’t know if I’d be relieved or short changed if I was balloted off.

In any case best wishes to the jury. It’s probably one of the hardest things they’ll ever face.
 
  • #866
I've been wondering if the religious faith of Simon and other family members would be forgiving of EP? I doubt I would be, but know that deeply religious people sometimes forgive, rather than hold any long term hostilities towards others.
Just a discussion point.

Interesting discussion point!

I have a feeling they would absolutely forgive her due to their faith but she would have to ask for forgiveness first for that door to be open possibly. Also not sure if the apology needs to be deemed sincere by them or not? Curious about the confession aspect of their faith too as that could also play into it.
 
  • #867
I didn't follow all of the trial, but just considering poisoning in general, and what would be required to prove poisoning under any circumstance, just off the top of my head:

1. The poisoning was via a substance known by the accused to be poisonous.

2. The poison was administered to the victims by the direct action of the accused.

3. To reinforce guilt, the actions of the accused appear designed to conceal what they are doing.

IMO, the issue of intention is basically a conclusion you draw from these three things.

For example, the person who put cyanide in random pills in a drugstore, was clearly intending to poison people. No one knows the motive, they didn't know who would die. But if there was CCTV of someone putting that known deadly toxin into pill bottles sitting on shelves in a drugstore, that person would be found guilty of the resulting deaths.

Or, a neighbour had access to a rare poison, and apparently injected it into bottles of pop, through the lids, and left the pop on their neighbour's front steps.

All LE had to do was find the neighbour in possession of this toxin, to convict them.

So, in this case, defense admits #2, it was indeed Erin who administered the poison to her guests.

I see many elements of #3. The unusual and unnecessary modification of the recipe to avoid sharing from the same dish is the main one. Reinforced by subsequent lies, efforts to destroy or delete evidence...

So then, it seems to me the key question is: #1 did she know they were death cap mushrooms?

She has claimed various complicated memory lapses and carelessness and last minute impluses, to account for how the deadly poison got into her guest's food.

But, she has testified she knew all about foraging, poisoned mushrooms, identifying types of mushrooms, testing small portions first.

And these were Death caps. No mistaking the problem, IMO. She did not sprinkle those into her children's food, in spite of frequently doing that.

Somehow, they only got into these individual lunch patties.

So, can the jury say she must have known this was a deadly toxin that would kill anyone who consumed it? I think so, yes.

IMO, it's the equivalent of serving your guests antifreeze and saying "I didn't notice the skull and crossbones symbol, I just thought it was a pretty color".

JMO and I welcome rebuttals
 
Last edited:
  • #868
ADMIN NOTE:

There is an ongoing cleanup of this thread (off topic, sub judice, personalizing, bickering, discussing other members, etc).

If members don't know by now what constitutes sub judice, we don't know how to further help you understand beyond what is stated in the Opening Posts. If you still don't understand, you will have to research it yourself. Members are responsible for what they post.

There seems to be an "us against them" tone going on in this discussion. Yes it is called a discussion, not a "battle of the bad guys vs the good guys". Discuss the case itself, not other members.

Reference to removed posts or moderation can result in members losing posting privileges.
Just don't do it.
 
  • #869
Has this case finally gone to the jury? I used to keep checking on its status and it seemed the trial went on forever! I finally stopped checking. In my opinion, there is only on verdict possible--guilty!
 
  • #870
I've been wondering if the religious faith of Simon and other family members would be forgiving of EP? I doubt I would be, but know that deeply religious people sometimes forgive, rather than hold any long term hostilities towards others.
Just a discussion point.

I've seen examples of this before, but I've always wondered how much is true forgiveness and how much is forgiveness because they are expected to forgive? I suppose as I can't get into that mindset I'll never know.

There is an element with EP of being an atheist around deeply religious people, and there is certainly a complicated dynamic there that maybe people cannot understand if they haven't personally experienced it. I wonder how much EP's religious conversion was a real one, or one to curry favour with her in-laws at the time? I was raised in a deeply religious home, and rejected it later in life. However, my in-laws are also deeply religious (and pillars of the local parish community etc) and presume I am a believer as well; I've never felt it would be worthwhile to upset that apple cart especially as we don't live close by.

That's why I recognised those eye-roll texts straight away. I have no beef with religious people whatsoever, but it can be frustrating when your in-laws make a statement that appears somewhat ludicrous and you feel like you can't say anything: my mother-in-law walks around saying 'Jesus was lost and Jesus was found' every time something goes missing and it is equal parts hilarious and equal parts ridiculous.

I'm not sure it really feeds into this case any at all, I've just always found it an interesting dynamic partly because I think she's clearly lying about being religious.
 
  • #871
I've seen examples of this before, but I've always wondered how much is true forgiveness and how much is forgiveness because they are expected to forgive? I suppose as I can't get into that mindset I'll never know.

There is an element with EP of being an atheist around deeply religious people, and there is certainly a complicated dynamic there that maybe people cannot understand if they haven't personally experienced it. I wonder how much EP's religious conversion was a real one, or one to curry favour with her in-laws at the time? I was raised in a deeply religious home, and rejected it later in life. However, my in-laws are also deeply religious (and pillars of the local parish community etc) and presume I am a believer as well; I've never felt it would be worthwhile to upset that apple cart especially as we don't live close by.

That's why I recognised those eye-roll texts straight away. I have no beef with religious people whatsoever, but it can be frustrating when your in-laws make a statement that appears somewhat ludicrous and you feel like you can't say anything: my mother-in-law walks around saying 'Jesus was lost and Jesus was found' every time something goes missing and it is equal parts hilarious and equal parts ridiculous.

I'm not sure it really feeds into this case any at all, I've just always found it an interesting dynamic partly because I think she's clearly lying about being religious.

Do super religious people forgive others or do they believe that only god can forgive sins?
 
  • #872
I wonder how much EP's religious conversion was a real one, or one to curry favour with her in-laws at the time?

I would say it is your Option B.


1. Erin took an affirmation on the stand, not an oath (a person holds a bible when taking an oath).

2. Erin removed their children from religious school, and sent them to a public school (despite her in-laws offering to pay the religious school fees, and instead of her cracking open her own wallet to pay the school fees).

3. Erin was too sick for church on Sunday morning after the poisonings, but not too sick to drive over an hour to her son's flying lesson.

imo
 
  • #873
RSBM

With the caveat 'if she is guilty' -

I like this thinking. Yes, it doesn't appear as if she had a plan, when one only considers what actually transpired, because this wasn't the plan. The plan fell apart when Simon didn't come, one guest survived, and the others didn't die before being able to describe what she served.

I think that is why she carefully selected a recipe (no children at the lunch to observe) to be able to say everyone was served from the same dish at the table. No one would know she had served individual portions.

I say try to think about the situation had the guests all died without speaking - it can't be the Wellington because I ate the same dish, I'm not sick and I gave the leftovers to my children and they aren't sick. Hence it's fine to put scraps in the bin, and keep the dehydrator because no one will suspect she used dried mushrooms for the Wellington, her receipt shows she bought and used fresh mushrooms. It must be something the guests brought with them that I didn't eat. I'd go with the cake and some kind of contamination (or salmonella in eggs?) because it seems she didn't share it with anyone after the lunch and she might have either eaten it all or disposed of it to prevent testing.

But then comes the confusion for EP about what to do after finding out the guests are alive and talking and being subjected to tests. How much detail have they given? Should she now present as sick or not? Hedge her bets - a little bit sick? If EP isn't sick it wasn't the Wellington so the original plan is very hard to detach from, and there is no back up plan for this eventuality, so initially show confusion about the death cap talk and don't cooperate with requests to stay for treatment and requests to bring in the children because it must have been something else. But then will the testing of the guests reveal the death caps? She starts to think about needing to admit to using dried mushrooms because button mushrooms from Woollies won't fit the bill. I think it's all revealed in the slow response to developments and vague answers about shops and listening out for what they know and the late dash to dump the dehydrator.

If guilty as alleged.
JMO

Same caveat - if she is guilty.

Agree with all of this, except I still lean towards mushrooms needing to be involved, rather than cake/eggs/salmonella.

If 5 related people (including the intended Simon) were found dead at home, there would be a serious investigation to find the likely cause. Autopsies would reveal the DC toxins, so if she was relying on a story based around something else, she would be immediately on the back foot.

You're right in that "it can't be the wellington, because I and the kids ate the same dish". The most logical thing to me, is what could be added to some people's meals and not others, that would contain DC toxins?
 
  • #874

"A list of issues Beale says are up to the jury to decide are summarised below:​

  • Whether Erin Patterson deliberately included death cap mushrooms in the beef Wellingtons
  • Whether she had the state of mind necessary for the alleged offences at the time she served the beef Wellingtons to her guests (for murder – intention to kill or cause really serious injury, attempted murder – only intention to kill required)
  • Whether she had good reasons not to kill her lunch guests
  • Whether the accused foraged for mushrooms
  • Why the kids were not at the lunch
  • Why she cooked individual beef Wellingtons
  • Whether the lunch guests had different-coloured dinner plates
  • Whether the accused put her meal on a different type of plate
  • Whether the accused engaged in incriminating conduct after the lunch"

 
  • #875
You're right in that "it can't be the wellington, because I and the kids ate the same dish".
Could be this aspect was just vaguely "good enough" in her own mind, she didn't realize it would be a very specific, very detailed issue for LE.

IMO, speculating, this often comes up because the person has successfully committed something(s) similar in the past. So they are complacent that no one will ask questions.

JMO
 
  • #876
  • #877
If the jury have a unanimous verdict that quickly, whichever way it goes, would they not wait at least an hour or so longer? For appearances, so that it doesn't seem that they hardly bothered to discuss it? And if they returned a verdict extremely quickly, would that possibly be grounds for appeal?

I think they should use the HUNG principle. Each jury member writes on a piece of paper one of the following:

H, Happy to go along with others (unlikely, but I bet it has happened)
U, Undecided
N, Not Guilty
G, Guilty

Obviously if they are all N or G, they just go through the motions and probably announce the verdict later today.

Combinations of HUG are good, so they have a group HUG and proceed to all eventually get to G. Verdict maybe late today or early tomorrow.

Clashes of N and G are bad, so a collective UGH would be uttered. If one is holding out, a metaphoric GUN is held to their head, until they hopefully come round. Verdict late in the week.

If they can't all eventually agree, a general NUH is arrived at, and the trial is declared HUNG. Unsure how long the judge would give them before this is declared.
 
  • #878
Do super religious people forgive others or do they believe that only god can forgive sins?
They do tend to forgive as well. There was a case in Sydney where a young man was driving under the influence and killed 3 young teenage siblings and their cousin. The parents of the children are religious and it was widely reported that they forgave the driver.
 
  • #879
I've been wondering if the religious faith of Simon and other family members would be forgiving of EP? I doubt I would be, but know that deeply religious people sometimes forgive, rather than hold any long term hostilities towards others.
Just a discussion point.
From what was reported about Simon’s and Ian’s testimonies, it was apparent that were likely more forgiving than the average person would be in the same situation. They still spoke quite highly (especially Simon) and non biased about Erin, who regardless of legal guilt directly caused the death of their loved ones. IMO
 
  • #880
They do tend to forgive as well. There was a case in Sydney where a young man was driving under the influence and killed 3 young teenage siblings and their cousin. The parents of the children are religious and it was widely reported that they forgave the driver.
well the Bible does mention forgiveness quite a bit. I imagine Ian would eventually try and forgive EP but I wouldn't fault him if he never did
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
139
Guests online
2,607
Total visitors
2,746

Forum statistics

Threads
633,191
Messages
18,637,741
Members
243,442
Latest member
Jsandy210
Back
Top