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

[Salah11]

I think her motive is rage not money. The triggers are Simon putting separated in the tax form and then paying $40 a month only for the children, and his family “rejecting” her following the separation.

Yep, and I understand getting angry as it does sound like she did a lot for his family. But there are a lot less extreme ways to get revenge

Paying $40 for two children is laughable and insulting. My Dad paid more than that 30 years ago for my upkeep.

moooooo

 

[JLZ]

Are we allowed to discuss the alleged attempted murder charges that were dropped?
Can anyone remind me of the approximate dates these occurred?
Just curious about their timing in relation to the escalation of conflict between EP and SP.

November 2021, May 2022, September 2022.

 

[Bats]

I think her motive is rage not money. The triggers are Simon putting separated in the tax form and then paying $40 a month only for the children, and his family “rejecting” her following the separation.

Do you have a theory about why Ian and Heather were included?

 

[Kemug]

It originally occurred to me that this could have been a vendetta against EP herself by a malicious person. However, I think that due to all the evidence arising and the fact that LE aren't stupid this cannot be the case. I still find it astounding that someone who has intellectual capacity and a brilliant mind and can do forward planning (air traffic control) would not join the dots and plan for aftermath in this outrageous crime so something is not quite explained. Unless she didn't care anymore and decided the rest of her life in prison is acceptable.

RSBM
She was an Air Traffic Controller for nearly 2 years. How would you like to have her controlling your air space these days?

 

[Yh5r]

Do you have a theory about why Ian and Heather were included?

I wasn't the poster but my theory is that as they were likely part of the close knit family unit too, they were the aunt and uncle of the estranged husband. I think EP had started to despise the whole family unit that she felt increasingly more excluded from and wanted the harm to be as widespread as possible?

JMO

 

[katydid23]

Her character and personality does not equate to being a murderer. I keep going back to the 4 questions the Judge gave the jury. 4 questions - beyond reasonably doubt will equal murder.

I'm not sure yet about her true character or personality though. Some of her comments in her FB group were very arrogant and rude---like calling the locals 'illiterate mother-%$#!ers"

And making fun of religious people, ranting that they are idiots for believing, etc. And she does not seem to have many friends or even close family relationships. Other than her 2 kids.

People describe her as distant and very much a loner. And very blunt and sarcastic. So I am not sure I can say for sure she's a healthy, stable person who would never snap.

I also found the emotional videos of the kids with the grandparents not quite the flex the defence thought it would be. It would have made the jury very empathetic for Simon and his parents, rather than perhaps trying to make them feel empathy for Erin, or whatever the hell he's trying to do.

To be fair, he doesn't have a lot to work with.

Yah, I was trying to figure out what the Defense was going for with those wholesome videos.

Maybe they were trying to imply that she would never purposely harm such a kind man who her kids were so close to?

 

[JennieM]

Do you have a theory about why Ian and Heather were included?

The family rejecting her could include them too? We don’t know the family dynamics or things that happened that she saw as betrayal.

 

[SouthAussie]

Do you have a theory about why Ian and Heather were included?

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.

 

[Old Soul]

November 2021, May 2022, September 2022.

Thanks, they are all earlier than November 2022 which is when it appears she became hostile about the tax return, child support and misunderstanding about not being invited to GP’s 70th birthday.

 

[JBowie]

How would you like to have her controlling your air space these days?

Imagining: "I said go to six thousand feet you stupid ^%*#&%!"

 

[Salah11]

Can anybody remember when Simon became sick for the first time?

It will be interesting to see if that came about after November 2022.

IMO

 

[arrogantcat]

"Day four of the trial has wrapped up.

Here’s a recap of what the court heard today:

1. The court was shown text messages where Simon and Erin communicated about her “forgotten” invitation to her mother-in-law’s 70th birthday. Simon said at this point in time there was “tension” in Erin’s relationship with his parents and between the pair.

2. Simon told the court Erin had “struggled” with mental illness and postnatal depression after the birth of their first child.

3. Simon said his estranged wife “hates” hospitals as he was asked about her discharging herself from Leongatha hospital against medical advice.

During the trial, the court will finish at around 1pm on Fridays.

We’ll be back on Monday morning to live blog day five from 10.30am."

Erin Patterson trial day four – as it happened

This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

Not a very impactful day for the prosecution IMO. Lots of ppl have PND, and her youngest child was 11 by the time of the murders.

In the messages about the party tiff, she sounds hurt more than anything.

None of this makes her sound murderous or even particularly unusual. If anything, they risk making some jury members feel sympathetic to her.

Her not liking hospitals potentially even helps with her erratic behaviour when she self-discharged.

I understand what they’re trying to do (and find the extra detail very interesting), but as they said in opening statements, they don’t really have a suggested motive here. Today’s testimony sort of highlighted that.

Not saying I think she is innocent - I’m just always fascinated by how the teams choose to present their case!

We know they have much stronger evidence to come, so it’s interesting to watch the big picture unfolding.

 

[SouthAussie]

Paying $40 for two children is laughable and insulting. My Dad paid more than that 30 years ago for my upkeep.

Though it is what he was ordered to pay by the Child Support Administration.

I have to pay child support payments to the Child Support Administration in payroll runs at work (after deducting the amounts from some staff wages). The amounts change each year after people file their tax returns.

 

[JennieM]

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.

Maybe she thought that it’d be more suspicious if only her in-laws went for lunch and then died? By inviting more people, did she think it would be less suspicious? Did her in-laws feel uncomfortable having lunch with her on their own? Simon said he was feeling uncomfortable and didn’t go. IMO they did something to upset her and that’s why they were there.

 

[Porky1]

I personally think it is all about EP's larger income, possibly income coming from jointly owned properties. And income that she may have received the totality of.

If that is the case, Child Support would consider that Simon already contributed his portion of the income from jointly owned properties. (Of which we know there are at least two, as per testimony yesterday.)

Child Support are not going to make him pay a pittance if he is not already contributing in some other significant way.

imo

She might have been asset rich but cash poor. He was on a Civil Engineers salary paying $39 a week - pffff. Once you go down the legal path/child support, there goes any civility. He did the wrong thing imho. There was no need for it. They were functioning and still taking family holidays, it seemed, responsible parenting. School fees were probably for a Baptist/Christian school in the area such as https://www.chairo.vic.edu.au/leongatha. Perhaps Erin as the Athesist decided to pull them out if he wasn’t contributing to school fees and an up yours as it escalated.

Raising children is expensive and asking for a split of medical expenses and then hearing the response re child support, the insulting $39? etc, I can see why she was pi**ed. He was financially secure very early due to Erin’s inheritance, smarts and generosity. It doesn’t sound like she was greedy, just an astute financially savvy woman and was clearly not rushed to go through a financial split. He seems nice enough but there are always two sides.

 

[SouthAussie]

Not a very impactful day for the prosecution IMO. Lots of ppl have PND, and her youngest child was 11 by the time of the murders.

In the messages about the party tiff, she sounds hurt more than anything.

None of this makes her sound murderous or even particularly unusual. If anything, they risk making some jury members feel sympathetic to her.

Her not liking hospitals potentially even helps with her erratic behaviour when she self-discharged.

I understand what they’re trying to do (and find the extra detail very interesting), but as they said in opening statements, they don’t really have a suggested motive here. Today’s testimony sort of highlighted that.

Not saying I think she is innocent - I’m just always fascinated by how the teams choose to present their case!

We know they have much stronger evidence to come, so it’s interesting to watch the big picture unfolding.

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.

 

[JBowie]

Though it is what he was ordered to pay by the Child Support Administration.

Seems this point had been missed by many people and bears reiterating each time, IMO.

 

[JennieM]

She might have been asset rich but cash poor. He was on a Civil Engineers salary paying $39 a week - pffff. Once you go down the legal path/child support, there goes any civility. He did the wrong thing imho. There was no need for it. They were functioning and still taking family holidays, it seemed, responsible parenting. School fees were probably for a Baptist/Christian school in the area such as https://www.chairo.vic.edu.au/leongatha. Perhaps Erin as the Athesist decided to pull them out if he wasn’t contributing to school fees and an up yours as it escalated.

Raising children is expensive and asking for a split of medical expenses and then hearing the response re child support, the insulting $39? etc, I can see why she was pi**ed. He was financially secure very early due to Erin’s inheritance, smarts and generosity. It doesn’t sound like she was greedy, just an astute financially savvy woman and was clearly not rushed to go through a financial split. He seems nice enough but there are always two sides.

He could have paid for his son’s anesthesia, not pretend his hands were tied because of what the child support services told him.

 

[Salah11]

Though it is what he was ordered to pay by the Child Support Administration.

I have to pay child support payments to the Child Support Administration in payroll runs at work. The amounts change each year after people file their tax returns.

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. So legally that’s what he was told to pay but it seems even to Simon it seemed a ridiculous amount.

ETA - I am not justifying her actions as it’s absolutely crazy but the picture being built doesn’t reflect to kindly on Simon. Moo

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

 

[JBowie]

That blows my mind too. Apparently she is very intelligent, but this was such poor planning.

"A high IQ is like height in a basketball player," says David Perkins, who studies thinking and reasoning skills at Harvard Graduate School of Education in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "It is very important, all other things being equal. But all other things aren't equal. There's a lot more to being a good basketball player than being tall, and there's a lot more to being a good thinker than having a high IQ." [bbm]

Why a high IQ doesn't mean you're smart

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427321.000-clever-fools-why-a-high-iq-doesnt-mean-youre-smart.html

som.yale.edu