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

[MsMarple]

As the intriguing saga drags into its second month, Daily Mail Australia can reveal Victoria Police's Forensic Services Department has been asked to prioritise its analysis of biological materials linked to the investigation.
…
It has been more than two weeks since Victoria Police provided a public update on its investigation.
…
In her statement, Ms Patterson said she portioned the meal onto plates and let her guests pick their own.

She said she took the last remaining plate and ate a serving, later handing the leftovers to hospital toxicologists for examination.
…
'I had been close with Simon's parents for a long period of time. Our relationship had continued in a fairly amicable way after I finished the relationship with their son Simon,' she said.

'Our relationship was affected to some degree by seeing them less after my marriage breakdown with Simon however I have never felt differently towards his parents.'

Inside the mushroom deaths investigation

Victorian detectives could take months to finalise their investigation into the mysterious deaths of Erin Patterson's lunch guests.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[JBowie]

[bbm]

Victoria Police's forensic department has long been under siege from demands by eager detectives.

The courts are awash with cases delayed by overworked forensic staff, with some cases pushed back by anywhere up to a year.

With nothing linked to the mushroom deaths even before a court, and the media storm surrounding the case, force command is understood to be eager to push the forensic tests through sooner rather than later.

While testing delays are cause for some concern, police sources have told Daily Mail Australia detectives will hardly have their 'cue in the rack'.

It has been more than two weeks since Victoria Police provided a public update on its investigation.

Back then, Detective Inspector Dean Thomas gave the media mixed reports on how they were treating Ms Patterson.

The seasoned detective started his briefing by declaring the deaths of her relatives were 'not suspicious'.

'The deaths are unexplained and for that purpose we are involved and we are working as hard as we can to try and identify why these deaths have happened and the circumstances surrounding them,' he said.

But under fire from reporters, Inspector Thomas provided a stumbling backflip.

'The 48-year old is, well, she is (a suspect), um she was, and she is because, um, she cooked those meals for us, for those people that were present,' he said.

He said homicide squad detectives would work to get to the bottom of the case.

'We've still got a lot of work to do. We need to understand what's caused these symptoms, what's caused ultimately the deaths of these three people,' the detective said.

'We need to understand what has occurred, what is the cause of the injuries ... what has caused their deaths and the circumstances surrounding all of that. So it's a very complex matter ... it's really interesting. You know four people turn up and three of them have passed away.'

Reporters have spent much of August camped outside Ms Patterson's home, with her estranged husband Simon Patterson hiring a publicist to try and fend off requests from around the world.

In the background, detectives will be analysing Ms Patterson's phone records and movements from the past few weeks and maybe months.

Her claims provided in that written statement will be scrutinised.

While tech experts trawl the data, officers on the ground will go about talking to anyone who may be able to help guide them closer to the truth.

Detectives will be closely monitoring the recovery of Mr Wilkinson, who remains gravely ill at the Austin Hospital.

What he says will likely assist detectives one way or the other in how the case progresses.

The highly publicised illness of Ms Patterson's former husband will be thoroughly examined, with officers working to rule in or out any links to her cooking.


IMO, going by the things he's said, the 'seasoned' DI Dean Thomas sounds like he's out of his depth when it comes to making statements to the media.

Inside the mushroom deaths investigation

Victorian detectives could take months to finalise their investigation into the mysterious deaths of Erin Patterson's lunch guests.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[kittythehare]

Not just that but the whole scenario of pastor and family wanting Erin to give way on custody but not get a new agreement to that effect certified by the Family Court. Or what in the scenario makes the family eligible to be murdered by Erin; what makes their opinion count as more than annoying.

She clearly had a fear of losing her children.
Their separation, was formalised in January '21.
Following years of separation.
He got sick in '22, they were living apart unless imaginary friends start saying she poisoned him.
She nursed him, reluctantly, she says following his sickness.
I presume she nursed him in her own home.
that was last year.
she says she declined to reconcile with him at that time and I see no reason to disbelieve her on that.

i don't get the impression that her social life is 'lit' exactly.

I think her life probably revolves around her children and not much else.

I don't see her as a confident woman and i have no idea what she has lived through.
i can think of many that could produce a state of fear in any woman under the sun, depending upon the methodologies used to apply the 'pressure'.

Just speculating.

 

[jepop]

But that sentence, “The police have not changed their statement, the children were in the house, not the movies” is odd. It claims a fact from a “no information” place. Has LE come out and added anything at all to their initial statement?

Yes, in reality nothing has changed as far as I can gather from the paraphrasing of the article. It's specified upthread that LE isn't quoted or referenced with new info.The ABC would have reported any formal public updates/ statements by now Imo. South Aussie said no sources, verfied or other, were referenced. Imo EP's statement re kids being at the movies is easily verifiable. Chances are, I'd say, that they were at the movies.Jmo. I've speculated before that the police's initial statement in regard to kids at home may have resulted from a mis-communication/misunderstanding when they first spoke with EP the weekend following the lunch or she mis-represented the situation inadvertently or deliberately at that time for reasons unknown. Jmo

 

[jepop]

If they’re at the movies, EP wouldn’t have to explain why they didn’t get ill after the lunch. Explaining why her immediate family didn’t get poisoned at a lunch where everyone else did would be very difficult. So, she’s claiming her kids weren’t there.

However, LE could easily ask the kids, or, better still, find out from EP who chaperoned at the movies, ‘cos young kids would have had to have a chaperone. No chaperone, no movies. EP wouldn’t be able to lie on this point, because LE can easily verify. She’s not going to be able to disentangle from this one if it’s a lie.

Exactly. That's why I don't think it's a lie.Moo

 

[jepop]

[bbm]

Victoria Police's forensic department has long been under siege from demands by eager detectives.

The courts are awash with cases delayed by overworked forensic staff, with some cases pushed back by anywhere up to a year.

With nothing linked to the mushroom deaths even before a court, and the media storm surrounding the case, force command is understood to be eager to push the forensic tests through sooner rather than later.

While testing delays are cause for some concern, police sources have told Daily Mail Australia detectives will hardly have their 'cue in the rack'.

It has been more than two weeks since Victoria Police provided a public update on its investigation.

Back then, Detective Inspector Dean Thomas gave the media mixed reports on how they were treating Ms Patterson.

The seasoned detective started his briefing by declaring the deaths of her relatives were 'not suspicious'.

'The deaths are unexplained and for that purpose we are involved and we are working as hard as we can to try and identify why these deaths have happened and the circumstances surrounding them,' he said.

But under fire from reporters, Inspector Thomas provided a stumbling backflip.

'The 48-year old is, well, she is (a suspect), um she was, and she is because, um, she cooked those meals for us, for those people that were present,' he said.

He said homicide squad detectives would work to get to the bottom of the case.

'We've still got a lot of work to do. We need to understand what's caused these symptoms, what's caused ultimately the deaths of these three people,' the detective said.

'We need to understand what has occurred, what is the cause of the injuries ... what has caused their deaths and the circumstances surrounding all of that. So it's a very complex matter ... it's really interesting. You know four people turn up and three of them have passed away.'

Reporters have spent much of August camped outside Ms Patterson's home, with her estranged husband Simon Patterson hiring a publicist to try and fend off requests from around the world.

In the background, detectives will be analysing Ms Patterson's phone records and movements from the past few weeks and maybe months.

Her claims provided in that written statement will be scrutinised.

While tech experts trawl the data, officers on the ground will go about talking to anyone who may be able to help guide them closer to the truth.

Detectives will be closely monitoring the recovery of Mr Wilkinson, who remains gravely ill at the Austin Hospital.

What he says will likely assist detectives one way or the other in how the case progresses.

The highly publicised illness of Ms Patterson's former husband will be thoroughly examined, with officers working to rule in or out any links to her cooking.


IMO, going by the things he's said, the 'seasoned' DI Dean Thomas sounds like he's out of his depth when it comes to making statements to the media.

Inside the mushroom deaths investigation

Victorian detectives could take months to finalise their investigation into the mysterious deaths of Erin Patterson's lunch guests.

www.dailymail.co.uk

RBBM re your final sentence, maybe Imo but by now, after needing to make some initial statement, a 'no comment' will probably suffice. Police will probably now use some specialist officer to communicate with the media. Important not to compromise the integrity of the investigation. The police are wary of misinterpretation by the media I'd say which I find completely understandable.Moo. Strictly speaking it was not the right time - not enough info - to definatively claim the deaths were suspicious - as in deliberately caused Imo. That's why the wording used was actually "unexplained" not 'suspicious' Imo.

I personally can already see some hyperbolic mis-representation happening right there above - with phrases like "stumbling back-flip". Conflating two separate points - the detetctive is quoted as saying "unexplained" not 'not suspicious'- that reads as the writer's conflation. Where's the backflip? Unexplained deaths and they are looking at the person who cooked a meal that all the deceased ate. They couldn't say for sure these deaths were suspicious (as in caused by another), so they didn't say it. Moo

 

[RickshawFan]

She clearly had a fear of losing her children.
Their separation, was formalised in January '21.
Following years of separation.
He got sick in '22, they were living apart unless imaginary friends start saying she poisoned him.
She nursed him, reluctantly, she says following his sickness.
I presume she nursed him in her own home.
that was last year.
she says she declined to reconcile with him at that time and I see no reason to disbelieve her on that.

i don't get the impression that her social life is 'lit' exactly.

I think her life probably revolves around her children and not much else.

I don't see her as a confident woman and i have no idea what she has lived through.
i can think of many that could produce a state of fear in any woman under the sun, depending upon the methodologies used to apply the 'pressure'.

Just speculating.

Well, she owns all those properties, so she presumably has to spend time managing them all. And at some point, she had to investigate what to buy, as well as design and build the current home she's living in. That's a lotta work!

I wonder if she was "nursing" Simon at the same time she actually couldn't be in her current home because it was under construction. She and Simon might perforce have been residing in the same house, but she's qualified it as "reluctantly taking care of Simon because he was deathly ill". I wonder what Simon's perspective on this caretaking is?

 

[jepop]

She clearly had a fear of losing her children.
Their separation, was formalised in January '21.
Following years of separation.
He got sick in '22, they were living apart unless imaginary friends start saying she poisoned him.
She nursed him, reluctantly, she says following his sickness.
I presume she nursed him in her own home.
that was last year.
she says she declined to reconcile with him at that time and I see no reason to disbelieve her on that.

i don't get the impression that her social life is 'lit' exactly.

I think her life probably revolves around her children and not much else.

I don't see her as a confident woman and i have no idea what she has lived through.
i can think of many that could produce a state of fear in any woman under the sun, depending upon the methodologies used to apply the 'pressure'.

Just speculating.

All that strikes me as a possible explanation for a knee jerk reaction to dump the hydrator anyway. Moo.

 

[kittythehare]

All that strikes me as a possible explanation for a knee jerk reaction to dump the hydrator anyway. Moo.

That is my reading too.

 

[kittythehare]

Well, she owns all those properties, so she presumably has to spend time managing them all. And at some point, she had to investigate what to buy, as well as design and build the current home she's living in. That's a lotta work!

I wonder if she was "nursing" Simon at the same time she actually couldn't be in her current home because it was under construction. She and Simon might perforce have been residing in the same house, but she's qualified it as "reluctantly taking care of Simon because he was deathly ill". I wonder what Simon's perspective on this caretaking is?

Well, if accurate, he obviously trusted her with his care.
No dates available for construction that I can see.

 

[jjenny]

All that strikes me as a possible explanation for a knee jerk reaction to dump the hydrator anyway. Moo.

Dehydrator, not hydrator. And if she didn't use it for anything nefarious, I fail to see what she would be concerned about. If police were to analyze it, they would have presumably found nothing, if it wasn't used for anything nefarious. I mean, she saved the beef wellington for analysis. But dehydrator, she dumps and lies to police about it.

 

[jjenny]

Well, if accurate, he obviously trusted her with his care.
No dates available for construction that I can see.

Or he wasn't suspicious at first.

 

[jepop]

Dehydrator, not hydrator. And if she didn't use it for anything nefarious, I fail to see what she would be concerned about. If police were to analyze it, they would have presumably found nothing, if it wasn't used for anything nefarious. I mean, she saved the beef wellington for analysis. But dehydrator, she dumps and lies to police about it.

thanks dehydrator - just a typo.

 

[MissTwiddle]

Do you think it’s a possibility that Simon was teasing her when he said is that what you used to poison them?

We don’t know what tone of voice he used but thinking of the timeline, would that fit in with before DC mushrooms were suspected?

Knowing she was a keen forager he might have assumed she’s used foraged mushrooms and accidentally used the wrong ones or teased her about her ability to pick safe ones.

Am I grasping here or is this reasonable?

 

[jjenny]

Do you think it’s a possibility that Simon was teasing her when he said is that what you used to poison them?

We don’t know what tone of voice he used but thinking of the timeline, would that fit in with before DC mushrooms were suspected?

Knowing she was a keen forager he might have assumed she’s used foraged mushrooms and accidentally used the wrong ones or teased her about her ability to pick safe ones.

Am I grasping here or is this reasonable?

My guess he was not in a teasing mood.

 

[Puzzles]

EP reportedly discarded the food dehydrator, not simply in a local trash bin, but at a rubbish dump. (Somewhere I read the tip was some distance from her home, but I can't find that now. Does anyone have a link for that statement, please?)

From her statement, reported by ABC NEWS: Ms Patterson said she was at the hospital with her children "discussing the food dehydrator" when her ex-husband, the son of the dead couple, asked: "Is that what you used to poison them?"

Worried that she might lose custody of the couple's children, Ms Patterson said she then panicked and dumped the dehydrator at the tip.

And yet, she reportedly provided the remains of the Beef Wellington for examination.

From the same ABC NEWS article: She said she preserved what was left of the lunch and gave it to hospital toxicologists for examination.

I'm wobbling on the fence a little for the first time as I ponder what these two actions might tell us, as it seems bizarre to ditch the dehydrator but produce meal leftovers.

The dehydrator: Did she dispose of it from fear that traces of toxic mushrooms or their spores may be found in the dehydrator? Or is she innocent and overreacting irrationally from panic at SP's suggestion?

Providing remnants of the beef dish for examination: If asked, she could have said there were no leftovers. But she didn't. She handed them over. Does this suggest the poison was not hidden in the main course but elsewhere? Or does it indicate both a toxic and a non-toxic dish were prepared? Or is she innocent of intentionally poisoning anything?

Woman who cooked suspected poisoned meal details where she bought mushrooms

The woman who cooked a meal that is believed to have contained poisonous mushrooms and led to the deaths of three people gives a lengthy written statement to police detailing her account of what happened, and revealing she was hospitalised after the incident.

www.abc.net.au

 

[CityKid]

She can't seem to decide whether kids ate the same as the guests or not.

They were there . . . oh but they ate a different meal . . . no they weren't there they went to the cinema . . . but they ate the beef wellington later . . . I scraped off the mushrooms so it wasn't the same.

Which is why IMO very little info is being let out. I don't know Australian law, but I wonder if the children told Simon where they were? I'm confident LE has spoken with Simon. EP can't decide which story to tell till she knows what LE knows.

 

[Baby baby Jane]

Because why would she lie and say the kids were at the movies when they were at home? Seems like that could be a clue imo

Needs an explanation about why they didn’t eat lunch. Cinema just a wild choice. So many TV crime shows the cinema is the alibi … and it always fails …

 

[CityKid]

In her statement, Ms Patterson said she portioned the meal onto plates and let her guests pick their own.

This is a line I can't get past because no one serves guests like that. It was a sit-down meal with a fancy main food.

 

[Baby baby Jane]

I wonder if EP says “half truth”, which could be later explained? “At the movies” could be “sitting in the basement, at home movie theater, watching the movies”. So if no one doubts, they are at the local cinema. But if checked seriously, “home, watching the movies”.

Likewise, she might have bought something in the Asian store, but not mushrooms at all. In our local Asian chain store, one can buy food, household items, cleaning products, makeup, even glassware. For all I know, she could have bought a wasp killer.

The beauty of buying some “Chinese herbal remedy” is that you have no clue what’s there. Years ago, before I visited dad, I’d go to a local Chinatown store and buy something for dad’s neighbor. Some Chinese remedy against alopecia, and he claimed that was the only one that ever worked. In hindsight, I’d think, it was finasteride, since it worked. But, in a different bottle, with Chinese hieroglyphs, it looked mysterious.

So Erin could have well bought something in her grocery store, but not mushrooms. In a package with Chinese letters, who can tell what it says, and she can later claim, it was a mistake. If I were LE, I’d check what types of rat poison local Asian grocery stores might sell, for example. Or herbicides, or something along the same line. Because I wonder if this is what she bought, and told half-truth.

Taking a wild guess here … I’ll bet they don’t sell any kind of Asian plant-rat-insect killer anything at the Asian grocery. Just thinking that Aussie trade import would say “no” to that.