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

[Hercule Holmes]

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

Agree, all speculation, but interesting discussion nevertheless. Of course, the "if she is guilty" caveat applies.

I've just had it pointed out to me something that is very relevant - the DC toxins are only detectable for around 48 hours. Many thanks to that poster. Any autopsy would never have found them.

It appears her mistake was putting too many death caps in the duxelle. Everything happened too quickly - they were supposed to experience initial gastro symptoms and recover for a while. The liver would then deteriorate over a period of time and the lunch would disappear into the unknown past.

The mushroom gravy (or similiar) was not a necessary component of the original plan. It may have been a handy back-up, pending what conversations the deceased had with others over the post-lunch period, before they eventually died.

 

[MrJ]

Probability wise how likely would it be for a verdict to be decided today?

 

[Lisa4]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

This might make me look like I'm talking about everybody, but I'm actually notorious in my job for being somebody who avoids conflict. If people start talking about other people, I remove myself from the situation. I also don't openly swear in the way EP did.

However, in every workplace, friendship group, family dynamics I've ever been in there have been many many people talking negatively about others behind their back. This is even people they like and are friends with.

The Facebook messages I saw were a bit crasser than you're average but I thought represented a potentially understandable family frustration. Saying she was done with the family, is the sort of hyperbolic thing people say all the time when they're upset.

They absolutely did demonstrate two different sides of their relationship (and an obvious lack of real religious faith), but again I can relate somewhat. My in-laws are the sort of people you couldn't have an open disagreement with and often because of religion.

They could be a motive for murder, I'm not saying that, and if she is guilty there has to be one that isn't strikingly obvious. I'm arguing that if I was a juror, and I was talking about reasonable doubt etc, I wouldn't think it was a very persuasive motive.

Of course the prosecution don't need to prove a motive, but I think it's naive to think it won't be a consideration when looking at reasonable doubt.

Thanks for the reply @MaxDecimus13
It seems the post you replied to was mine but has been removed and unfortunately I cannot work out which post it was or why it would have been removed, so I'm sorry I can't reply intelligently! Unless anyone knows of a way to view our own removed posts?

 

[Eloise]

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

I would imagine he may forgive, but won't forget. Definitely can't see any attempts to ever get together for a meal again (and that's not a reference to poisoning per se, more of a 'you can forgive but that doesn't mean you're going to be friendly'.) JMO

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).

Husband of woman accused of killing three children asks for forgiveness for wife

Patrick Clancy said his wife struggled with a medical condition he did not specify, which might have been a contributing factor in the deaths of her children.

www.nbcnews.com

https://www.npr.org/2023/09/29/1202582119/a-mother-forgives-her-sons-killer-and-the-two-forge-a-friendship

This is the example that always really blows my mind and humbles me. This family were amazing.

Danny and Leila Abdallah ‘didn’t want to lose our other three children’ to bitterness after Oatlands crash​

 

[Hercule Holmes]

Probability wise how likely would it be for a verdict to be decided today?

29.723 percent. A cryptic fan will explain why.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

It's now 10.40 am.
I reread a post from yesterday saying the jurors would recommence their deliberations at 10.15 am.

It's now midday and no verdict so far.

 

[Scuffy35]

Thanks for the reply @MaxDecimus13
It seems the post you replied to was mine but has been removed and unfortunately I cannot work out which post it was or why it would have been removed, so I'm sorry I can't reply intelligently! Unless anyone knows of a way to view our own removed posts?

Check the "Alerts" to the left of the "search" near top right of the screen.

 

[iridized]

It's now 10.40 am.
I reread a post from yesterday saying the jurors would recommence their deliberations at 10.15 am

How many hours does the average Australian work in a week? Why such short workdays for this jury? If they stop at 4:30 and take a short lunch break that still leaves less than 6 hours per day they are deliberating.

 

[Detechtive]

How many hours does the average Australian work in a week? Why such short workdays for this jury? If they stop at 4:30 and take a short lunch break that still leaves less than 6 hours per day they are deliberating.

38 hours is considered full time work here, with 1 hour a day breaks (usually 30 for lunch, and morning and afternoon tea - 15 each).

 

[Yh5r]

How many hours does the average Australian work in a week? Why such short workdays for this jury? If they stop at 4:30 and take a short lunch break that still leaves less than 6 hours per day they are deliberating.

The jury consists of a variety of Australians, many of whom would likely not be used to or experienced in this kind of work - analysing and assessing a large amount data. I feel it's a good thing not to overload them with it and 6 hours a day seems plenty of time for focused deliberations.

 

[L_B]

The jury consists of a variety of Australians, many of whom would likely not be used to or experienced in this kind of work - analysing and assessing a large amount data. I feel it's a good thing not to overload them with it and 6 hours a day seems plenty of time for focused deliberations.

Agree, it can be very mentally draining processing a lot of information!

 

[Hercule Holmes]

The jury consists of a variety of Australians, many of whom would likely not be used to or experienced in this kind of work - analysing and assessing a large amount data. I feel it's a good thing not to overload them with it and 6 hours a day seems plenty of time for focused deliberations.

Also, there is no upper age limit in Victoria. Although you can claim an exemption if you are over 70.

So, theoretically, you could have a number of retired people who aren't used to working at all. Do we know the age demographic at all?

 

[Ellery84]

How many hours does the average Australian work in a week? Why such short workdays for this jury? If they stop at 4:30 and take a short lunch break that still leaves less than 6 hours per day they are deliberating.

It depends on the industry.

Different industries have different awards and employment conditions attached to them.

MOO/
It’s probably better for the jury to have more breaks and less time deliberating as they’re more likely to feel mentally more and fresh in terms maximising their cognitive abilities, and minimising the cognitive load.

We have to remember that these jury members have developed their legal knowledge and cognitive stamina over the last 10 weeks but really this is still new to them - they may be plumbers, civil engineers, bar tenders, hair dressers, florists, stay at home parents - whatever; they may not have the cognitive and academic stamina that a lawyer or a judge would have.

IMO

 

[musicaljoke]

dbm

 

[Ellery84]

The jury consists of a variety of Australians, many of whom would likely not be used to or experienced in this kind of work - analysing and assessing a large amount data. I feel it's a good thing not to overload them with it and 6 hours a day seems plenty of time for focused deliberations.

I literally said the same thing, how interesting.

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

 

[jesse]

It depends on the industry.

Different industries have different awards and employment conditions attached to them.

MOO/
It’s probably better for the jury to have more breaks and less time deliberating as they’re more likely to feel mentally more and fresh in terms maximising their cognitive abilities, and minimising the cognitive load.

We have to remember that these jury members have developed their legal knowledge and cognitive stamina over the last 10 weeks but really this is still new to them - they may be plumbers, civil engineers, bar tenders, hair dressers, florists, stay at home parents - whatever; they may not have the cognitive and academic stamina that a lawyer or a judge would have.

IMO

Really?

 

[Ellery84]

Really?

Really what?

 

[Ellery84]

Also, there is no upper age limit in Victoria. Although you can claim an exemption if you are over 70.

So, theoretically, you could have a number of retired people who aren't used to working at all. Do we know the age demographic at all?

No, we just know the gender mix of the final 12 and that’s really all.

 

[Detechtive]

Also, there is no upper age limit in Victoria. Although you can claim an exemption if you are over 70.

So, theoretically, you could have a number of retired people who aren't used to working at all. Do we know the age demographic at all?

While jurors are randomly selected from the electoral roll, the final jury pool is often skewed due to common exemptions. People with demanding or essential jobs, such as doctors, nurses, self-employed business owners, and carers are frequently excused, as are those in legal or law enforcement roles. As a result, juries tend to be made up of retirees, public servants, casual workers, unemployed or underemployed, and people whose employers support time off. This means the typical jury reflects a narrower, often lower to middle income demographic, rather than a true cross-section of society.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

The jury will deliberate not only Monday to Friday but Saturday as well.
I presume the Fridays will not be half a day.