Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #7 *Arrest*

[Bats]

I have to wonder what Ian and Heather's relationship was like with Erin.

They had never been invited for a meal before the fatal (and near-fatal) one - and they were both the ones to quickly question why Erin's lunch had been on a different kind of plate, after they fell ill.

I know this is a bit weird but maybe Erin thought, if i invite these two along its going to look less like i am trying to kill anyone.

In her mind she may think the reason she is wanting kill her mother and father in law looks too obvious, so she try's to make it look less obvious by inviting Ian and Heather (who perhaps she secretly doesn't like anyway).

Purely speculating and MOO.

 

[Sarahlou]

How did she think she’d get away with it?

I wonder this about most murderers. I think they either don't fully think it through or don't care. The result of their actions is worth the risk to them.

 

[SouthAussie]

Yep I understand that but she was obviously annoyed by it. Simon even admits it was inadequate so I can not imagine how she felt at such a injustice.

Erin Patterson turned ‘extremely aggressive’ in dispute with estranged husband, mushroom murders trial hears

Simon Patterson tells Victorian court of ‘inflammatory messages’ his wife sent to his parents amid a financial dispute

www.theguardian.com

Yes, I get that. But I also get how the system works.

For all we know she could have been trying to exert control over Simon by asking for payments that she was not entitled to. Then getting ticked off when he stuck to the system.

It is not as if he was an uncaring father. He was reportedly involved in carting the kids around, spending time with them, coaching basketball, and is now probably their fulltime carer.

 

[mamamama9873]

I also don’t see a negative picture of SP. He cared for his children, was with them in hospital after the incident for example and as SouthAussie said is now likely the full time carer for them.

Refusing to pay extra was likely due to him following official orders. When emotions run high after a separation, lawyers and authorities often advise sticking strictly to official guidelines to prevent further emotional entanglement with an ex partner.

 

[SouthAussie]

I also don’t see a negative picture of SP. He cared for his children, was with them in hospital after the incident for example and as SouthAussie said is now likely the full time carer for them.

Refusing to pay extra was likely due to him following official orders. When emotions run high after a separation, lawyers and authorities often advise sticking strictly to official guidelines to prevent further emotional entanglement with an ex partner.

The Child Support Administration factors in ALL of the expenses for raising a child, and factors in both of the parents income and Govt entitlements, and arrives at a Child Support figure according to that.

They don't have a problem with parents buying things for the children directly, such as gifts and clothes and toys and phones. But the child rearing expenses are factored in.

I think the defence attorney was trying to make Simon look bad, and it may have worked with people who don't know how Child Support payments are determined.

 

[Salah11]

I also don’t see a negative picture of SP. He cared for his children, was with them in hospital after the incident for example and as SouthAussie said is now likely the full time carer for them.

Refusing to pay extra was likely due to him following official orders. When emotions run high after a separation, lawyers and authorities often advise sticking strictly to official guidelines to prevent further emotional entanglement with an ex partner.

Being a great father doesn’t mean he was a good husband.

 

[arrogantcat]

Today was solely a day for the defence to cross examine Simon. So all you read about today is the defence using their tactics in cross examination.

Ah that explains it then! Thank you for this

 

[mamamama9873]

Being a great father doesn’t mean he was a good husband.

He still spoke kindly and empathetically about his ex wife, especially considering she caused his parents’ deaths!
The text messages exchanged between them also point to him having a kind and caring personality and being a good communicator.
I don’t see any signs of him being anything but a good husband. Even if he wasn’t, how is it relevant to the case?

 

[Salah11]

The Child Support Administration factors in ALL of the expenses for raising a child, and factors in both of the parents income and Govt entitlements, and arrives at a Child Support figure according to that.

They don't have a problem with parents buying things for the children directly, such as gifts and clothes and toys and phones. But the child rearing expenses are factored in.

I think the defence attorney was trying to make Simon look bad, and it may have worked with people who don't know how Child Support payments are determined.

She put property into his name, I believe?



So she gets screwed by the system because she was generous with her inheritance and helped out her husband when married.

He gains while she lost massively and let’s not forget her giving loans to his family members. It also seems like she lost his family’s support when they split up, even though she had clearly done so much for them. I can see where that resentment came from and I am not justifying her actions as they are unforgivable but I can understand why she would of felt slighted and hurt.

ETA- he stops paying the school fees and she gets €50 a month for child maintenance (I forgot to mention that part)

IMO

 

[Ellery84]

ETA:[wiki]
Rogers told the court that police forensically examined the dehydrator unit and found Patterson's fingerprints and traces of amanita phalloides mushroom toxins; which was also detected in the urine samples of the male guests.

Oh my.

And yet she’s still pleading “not guilty.”

I wonder how long it will take for the jury to come back after they begin to deliberate in 5 weeks?

 

[SouthAussie]

She put property into his name, I believe?



So she gets screwed by the system because she was generous with her inheritance and helped out her husband when married.

He gains while she lost massively and let’s not forget her giving loans to his family members. It also seems like she lost his family’s support when they split up, even though she had clearly done so much for them. I can see where that resentment came from and I am not justifying her actions as they are unforgivable but I can understand why she would of felt slighted and hurt.

IMO

I said before, I think she likely got all of the income from the properties. She must have a substantially higher income than he does, and she was not working.

If she was getting all of the income from the properties, his half of that income is already deemed as support for the children.

Simon has absolutely no obligation to support her.

And they were talking about removing his name from two properties and adding it to a different one. So formal separation items were seemingly underway, to an extent. With perhaps no money exchanging hands in those property arrangements.

 

[Salah11]

I said before, I think she likely got all of the income from the properties. She must have a substantially higher income than he does, and she is not working.

If she was getting all of the income from the properties, his half of that income is already deemed support for the children.

This is why prenups are so handy as you avoid all this mess.

 

[Ellery84]

I know this is a bit weird but maybe Erin thought, if i invite these two along its going to look less like i am trying to kill anyone.

In her mind she may think the reason she is wanting kill her mother and father in law looks too obvious, so she try's to make it look less obvious by inviting Ian and Heather (who perhaps she secretly doesn't like anyway).

Purely speculating and MOO.

Erin seems to have allegedly hurt a lot of people for no very good reason. <Not that there would ever be a good reason to harm another human of course>

It’s a long bow to draw, and the relationship connections as part of the motive seem to be very complex. I think motive would have been one of the more difficult aspects of the case that the Prosecution team to deal with, which is maybe why they’ve just not delved into “motive.”

So let’s say her prime target was Simon. A marriage relationship is likely to hold some big feelings for Erin. So let’s say she wants to kill him and he’s so rude as to not even turn up to his own murder.

Let’s say Erin is originally mad at Simon over perceived rejection of her marriage and lack of financial support of the kids …. Simon doesn’t turn up to the lunch, she plans to and then she allegedly kills his parents.

She is also upset at Simon’s parents, as she feels they’re not supporting her enough after the separation, and so she also invites Ian and Heather to lunch, kills Heather and attempts to kill Ian.

None of this makes sense.

Then I think of all of the news reports about Erin being in a Kelli Lane crime group and then splinter groups. How big a part of her life were those groups and how involved was she with her online contacts from those groups?

Was she somehow infatuated with Kelli lane as a murderer and wanting to pull off something inspired by her?

What am I missing? And the most important question - who really is Erin Patterson?

 

[seekingjustice**]

How did she think she’d get away with it?

I don't think she expected it to turn into a police investigation—she probably assumed it would be viewed as just an unfortunate case of food poisoning and that things would end there.

 

[JBowie]

Licensed Professional Counselor of Mental Health Dr. Todd Grande has been following this case from the USA. His recently-stated opinion of EP via his YouTube channel is:

"Self-centred, impulsive, irresponsible, insecure, desperate, vindictive, petty, sadistic, possessive, manipulative, deceptive, has a sense of entitlement and is moderately creepy".

To me these personality characteristics are traits of a narcissist.

 

[Ellery84]

I don't think she expected it to turn into a police investigation—she probably assumed it would be viewed as just an unfortunate case of food poisoning and that things would end there.

That is a great point. She probably thought it would be a public health investigation and it would just dissipate after that. IMO

I think spotting her at the tip getting rid of the mushroom dehydrator was a bit of a tell, though. That wasn’t thought through particularly well. IMO

 

[Ellery84]

Licensed Professional Counselor of Mental Health Dr. Todd Grande has been following this case from the USA. His recently-stated opinion of EP via his YouTube channel is:

"Self-centred, impulsive, irresponsible, insecure, desperate, vindictive, petty, sadistic, possessive, manipulative, deceptive, has a sense of entitlement and is moderately creepy".

To me these personality characteristics are traits of a narcissist.

To me it’s giving narcissist with borderline personality disorder and unmedicated depression. A really bad combination. IMO.

 

[JBowie]

I think the defence attorney was trying to make Simon look bad, and it may have worked with people who don't know how Child Support payments are determined.

I hope the Prosecution twigs to this and makes it plain to the jury.

And I'm not sure how the Defence's trying to paint SP in a poor light has any relevance to 3 people being fatally poisoned by a meal cooked by EP.

 

[seekingjustice**]

I’ve noticed a bit of a pattern in her personality where it looks like she has used health concerns to gain sympathy or manipulate people, and it’s probably worked well for her in the past— it seems she tried the same approach to bring everyone together for the special lunch, but this time Simon didn’t go along with it.

 

[JennieM]

He still spoke kindly and empathetically about his ex wife, especially considering she caused his parents’ deaths!
The text messages exchanged between them also point to him having a kind and caring personality and being a good communicator.
I don’t see any signs of him being anything but a good husband. Even if he wasn’t, how is it relevant to the case?

It’s relevant because she killed his family IMO.