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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #561

Defence says 'incriminating' behaviour after lunch was 'panic'
15:55​

Tiffanie Turnbull
Live reporter

Defence barrister Colin Mandy says while the prosecution will try to cast Erin Patterson's behaviour in the days after the lunch as "incriminating", jurors should consider how someone might react in that situation.

"Might people say or do things that are not well thought out... and might make them look bad."

"The defence case is that she panicked because she was over whelmed by the fact that these four people had become so ill because of the food she had served them. Three people died."

Erin Patterson was 'generous and kind' to her family - defence
15:56​

Simon Atkinson
Australia producer, reporting from court

The court is being told a bit more about Erin Patterson

"She was comfortable financially," Mr Mandy said.

"She was generous and kind to the wider Patterson family including being generous with her money."
 
  • #562
1745992823273.webp
 
  • #563

Defendant admits she told some lies, court hears
15:59​


Simon Atkinson
Australia producer, reporting from court

"The prosecution says, ‘well she got rid of the dehydratorand that makes her look guilty’. She admits that,” defence lawyer Colin Mandy says.

"She lied about getting rid of the dehydrator. She admits that."

"But consider why she would lie about that when she’d postedphotographs of mushrooms in the dehydrator."

Ms Patterson also admits that she lied to police about having never foraged for mushrooms.

"She did forage for mushrooms... She denied



Intent is the overarching issue in this case - judge
16:00​

As the defence finishes up, Judge Christopher Beale recaps the thrust of the trial for the jury as he sends them home for the day:



Quote Message
The overarching issue is whether she intended to kill or cause very serious injury."

Judge Christopher Beale
 
  • #564
Key Event
4m ago

Erin Patterson admits picking mushrooms, lying to police​


By Judd Boaz​

Reporting by Kristian Silva

As Mr Mandy's address comes to an end, Erin Patterson tilts her head back in the dock with tears welling in her eyes.

Mr Mandy concedes his client never had cancer.

Mr Mandy also argues his client did eat some of the same meal that the other lunch guests, despite not falling as sick.

Then he addresses what Ms Patterson did after the lunch, disputing claims by the prosecution that she was trying to cover her tracks.

Mr Mandy says his client "panicked" and now admitted dumping the dehydrator and lying to police.

But that was because she was overwhelmed that people had died because of a meal she served, he says.

Finally, he concedes she did forage the mushrooms at the centre of the case.

But Ms Patterson denied ever deliberately seeking out death cap mushrooms, he argues.

 
  • #565
4.05pm

Signs of death cap mushrooms in beef Wellington leftovers found in bin​

The jury is now being told about the forensic evidence in the case.

Prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, said fingerprints found in the dehydrator matched those on Erin Patterson’s left hand. An analysis of the leftover beef Wellington taken from Erin’s bin, and vegetable matter taken from the dehydrator – discovered at the tip – also found signs of death cap mushrooms.

Prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC.

Prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC.Credit: Jason South

Rogers said death cap mushroom toxins were detected in urine samples taken from Don Patterson and Ian Wilkinson in hospital. No toxins were detected in the biological samples taken from Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson, but Gail’s autopsy findings were compatible with pathology typically seen from ingesting death cap mushrooms, and in Heather’s case, the acute liver failure that contributed to her death was compatible with the consumption of death cap mushrooms.

“It is the prosecution case that the accused deliberately poisoned with murderous intent each of Ian Wilkinson, Heather Wilkinson, Gail Patterson and Donald Patterson on 29 July [2023] at her house in Leongatha after inviting them for lunch on the pretense that she’d been diagnosed with cancer, and needed advice about how to break up to the children,” Rogers told the jury.

Rogers said it was also the prosecution case that Erin did not consume death cap mushrooms at the lunch and “pretended she was suffering the same type of illness as the lunch guests to cover that up”.

Erin was reluctant to have her children medically assessed because she knew that, like her, they had not eaten any poisoned food, Rogers said.

“The accused lied about getting death cap mushrooms from an Asian grocer. And the accused disposed of the dehydrator which contained death cap mushroom remnants to conceal what she had done,” the prosecutor said.

3.54pm

Accused didn’t have cancer, didn’t ingest death cap mushrooms: prosecutor​

By​

Prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, told the jury it’s the prosecution case that Erin Patterson didn’t ingest death cap mushrooms at the lunch on July 29, 2023 and didn’t suffer from amanita poisoning.

“It is also the prosecution case that the accused had not been diagnosed with cancer prior to the lunch, and her claim in this regard was deliberately false,” Rogers told the jury.

“It is the prosecution case that the accused used the false claim that she had serious medical issues to ensure and to explain why the children would not be present at the lunch.”


3.49pm

‘No record’ Erin Patterson had a cancer diagnosis​

By​

The intensive care specialist found there was no sufficient evidence in the files provided to support the assertion that Erin Patterson was diagnosed with cancer in mid-2023, prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, told the jury.

A self-administered screening test for cervical cancer, which was completed on March 2, 2023 was negative, and there were notes indicating that the accused was advised of this negative result three weeks later, the jury heard.

“Victorian Cancer Registry, which maintains a record of people with cancer in Victoria, has no record of the accused having received a cancer diagnosis,” Rogers said.


Prosecutors don’t have to prove motive​

4.09pm​

Prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, has told the jury her legal team does not need to prove a motive for the alleged crimes.

“Now, why would the accused do this? What is the motive?” Rogers said towards the end of her opening address.

“Motive is not something that has to be proven by the prosecution. You do not have to be satisfied what the motive was, or even that there was one, the prosecution will not be suggesting that there was a particular motive to do what she did.

“What you will have to focus on and focus your attention on is whether you are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the charges on the indictment, not why she may have done so.”

 
  • #566
Key Event
4m ago

Erin Patterson admits picking mushrooms, lying to police​

By Judd Boaz​

Reporting by Kristian Silva

As Mr Mandy's address comes to an end, Erin Patterson tilts her head back in the dock with tears welling in her eyes.

Mr Mandy concedes his client never had cancer.

Mr Mandy also argues his client did eat some of the same meal that the other lunch guests, despite not falling as sick.

Then he addresses what Ms Patterson did after the lunch, disputing claims by the prosecution that she was trying to cover her tracks.

Mr Mandy says his client "panicked" and now admitted dumping the dehydrator and lying to police.

But that was because she was overwhelmed that people had died because of a meal she served, he says.

Finally, he concedes she did forage the mushrooms at the centre of the case.

But Ms Patterson denied ever deliberately seeking out death cap mushrooms, he argues.


This seems like it is going to be a very difficult case for Mr Mandy.
If only barristers were allowed to refuse clients, he may not be embroiled in this mess.
 
  • #567
If someone other than me or someone close to me had access to my phone I wouldn't feel comfortable until I did a factory reset
 
  • #568
The lack of motive given by prosecution could be the difference between guilty and not guilty imo.
 
  • #569
If someone other than me or someone close to me had access to my phone I wouldn't feel comfortable until I did a factory reset


So if police seized your phone after three people died, you would do a remote factory reset?
 
  • #570
I love how she literally ate from a different colored smaller plate and made it so obvious that when her guests were suss about it.

She isn’t the smartest cookie in the jar.

IMO
 
  • #571
I love how she literally ate from a different colored smaller plate and made it so obvious that when her guests were suss about it.

She isn’t the smartest cookie in the jar.

IMO
I am absolutely stunned by how much has come out on the first day of trial. The lies, the inconsistencies. I have never seen anything like it.
 
  • #572
The defence has some good points.

I can see getting into a panic when you realise you've made a terrible mistake, and then made it worse by trying to cover it up.

I thought all along that the mushrooms were picked.
And no I don't go along with the theory that a mushroom expert could never make a mistake.
I'm not so sure she was an expert anyway. Just because others thought so doesn't make it so.

Oh and she has to be an expert because she had a book about mushrooms and had foraged.
I've foraged more than once and thought I knew what to look for but some of the deadliest ones would have fooled me so I stopped many years ago.

I started to think it was intentional but now I have my doubts. So that's the defences job and I think they're off to a good start.

And yes once got my phone back from the police I would figure they'd finished with it and yes I would factory reset.

Or were there orders from the Police to her not to do that. Was her phone no longers hers to do what she wanted with,

Any strangers at all looking through my phone and I wouldn't feel comfortable using it, no matter who.

So there you go
 
Last edited:
  • #573

Jury will be sequestered during deliberations​


Helen Sullivan
Live reporter

Camera crews outside court

Image caption, Camera crews and journalists outside court today

At the opening of the trial on Tuesday, Justice Christopher Beale explained that when the jurors start their deliberations, they will be sequestered.

What does this mean? It means that once the jury has heard all the evidence, closing speeches, and final directions from Justice Beale, they "will be bussed to a hotel at an undisclosed location, where they will stay overnight and be bussed back to the court the next morning to continue their deliberations," he said.

In the meantime, they will be able to go home at the end of each day in court.

The sequestering measure was, Justice Beale explained, to protect the jury "from any interference or outside pressure" and to "safeguard the integrity of their verdicts".

 
  • #574
The lack of motive given by prosecution could be the difference between guilty and not guilty imo.

Lack of motive will be inconsequential for the jury when determining whether the accused is guilty or innocent of the crime, in this trial.
 
  • #575
After the first day, I still believe she is guilty as charged.

I don’t believe they need a motive as there doesn’t seem to be any logic behind this plot. It just seems vengeful and not at all well-thought out.

IMO
 
  • #576
I thought I'd hold off on giving my opinion on innocent or guilty. Either could be true.

I'll let the jury decide.
 
  • #577
I always thought give her the benefit of the doubt but holy guacamole … guilty as charged!
 
  • #578
I thought I'd hold off on giving my opinion on innocent or guilty. Either could be true.

I'll let the jury decide.


After the first day one way looks a lot more likely. IMO
 
  • #579

Key things we heard on day one of trial​


Helen Sullivan
Live reporter

The prosecution and defence have finished their opening statements on the first day of Erin Patterson's trial. Here's what they told the court:

 
  • #580
We haven't heard the half of it yet. All we have heard is the case outline. It will be interesting to hear what was on all of those found devices. And what forensics found on EP's factory-reset phone.

And while motive isn't a factor, it will be interesting to hear if SP had a new relationship, or what the terms of EP's in-laws wills were.

There are weeks of testimony ahead.

imo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
79
Guests online
1,333
Total visitors
1,412

Forum statistics

Threads
632,423
Messages
18,626,358
Members
243,148
Latest member
ayuuuiiix
Back
Top