Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #8 *Arrest*

Status
Not open for further replies.
I find it sad that Simon has to hear this information this way, particularly the son's words.
From my perspective there are a couple of things going on.
  • The court reporters are quite selective about what they choose to take from an entire police interview, condensing (90 minutes?) into a few paragraphs with an emphasis on negative content.
  • Erin Patterson's own recounting of events and happenings to her children has very much shaped their perspective of the relationship between her and Simon, what was said between them, and the context under which things happened or were said. Her negativity about Simon is very clear through the son's words.
  • Simon, as we've seen by his texts and communication between him and Erin, is not at all negative towards Erin.
  • Simon perhaps isn't particularly proactive in arranging activities for the kids when he has them. If anything positive comes from this event, it's an opportunity to improve his relationship with his children. Both from his own actions, and from the absence of Erin's negative input.
All MOO
Thank You. Well thought out musings.

I agree about court journalists hand picking negative tidbits for the articles I wish we could see a full transcript.

Also EP's attitude towards Simon is seen clearly in her son's testimony. It kind of borders upon parental alienation, imo. Things like 'Dad likes to do things to hurt mom' etc.

Weekend Dads have a hard time. I spent many weekends with my Dad when I was younger.

Sometimes he planned big events for us and sometimes we just hung out at his apartment pool. But no matter what h did, we usually found ways to complain about it lol

Years later I looked back on it and thanked him profusely for not bailing on us, like some of my friend's divorced parents did.
 
Two messages from Ms Patterson to the group were also tendered to the trial as evidence.

“I’ve been hiding powdered mushrooms in everything. Mixed it into chocolate brownies yesterday, the kids had no idea,” one message reads.

Another said; “So fun fact the dehydrator reduces mushroom mass by 90 per cent. Do you think woolies would mind if I put the dehydrator into their vegetable section and dry things before I buy them.”





https://www.news.com.au/national/vi...ws-story/fd1e8b63084187736f45463483a0dc71?amp
 
Thank You. Well thought out musings.

I agree about court journalists hand picking negative tidbits for the articles I wish we could see a full transcript.

Also EP's attitude towards Simon is seen clearly in her son's testimony. It kind of borders upon parental alienation, imo. Things like 'Dad likes to do things to hurt mom' etc.

Weekend Dads have a hard time. I spent many weekends with my Dad when I was younger.

Sometimes he planned big events for us and sometimes we just hung out at his apartment pool. But no matter what h did, we usually found ways to complain about it lol

Years later I looked back on it and thanked him profusely for not bailing on us, like some of my friend's divorced parents did.

Totally agree. Someone said upthread how they thought that Simon was somehow bad for making the kids not want to go there, but it sounds like to me, she is oversharing and alienating him from the kids, not the reverse.

The comment also completely ignores the fact that teen boys are pretty fickle and difficult, and little girls are more likely to want to stay with their dad, IMO.
 
I still think she planned to kill them all. At least 2 months in advance.
If she did collect death caps intentionally, you’d like to believe that they were considered an option, maybe just to use a small amount on Simon if things deteriorated in the future, to make him sick. Evil thoughts but not necessarily a plan.

The prosecution has a very good case, it appears. Iam still trying to think outside the box, to look for clues, possibilities.
 
As far as we've heard, Simon:
  • Didn't know that Erin used dried powdered mushrooms in any dishes (until the Monday after the luncheon)
  • Didn't know she owned a dehydrator
  • Didn't know what she was preparing for the lunch
  • Avoided going into her house at all
Suggesting that he intentionally killed his Mother, Father and Aunt, and Framed Erin for their murder is a massive stretch.
Of course! I know.
I like to step away from the obvious to consider possibilities.
 
Greg Lynn's story was plausible. Unlikely, but plausible.

We haven't heard Erin Patterson's police interview yet, but I think she's going to have a tough time explaining how she accidentally attended these two exact locations that death caps had been reported growing, accidentally picked them, and then accidentally fed them to her inlaws.

Edit - I'm also keen to hear how she accidentally cured herself of ovarian cancer of the elbow.
I hope the Prosecution read your last sentence, and bring it up!!!
 

Erin, Simon, and his parents, Don and Gail, are in a group chat messaging platform called Signal, where they all get together and communicate at times.​


I think this could be the problem and a motive, where she's had enough of the whole lot of them. The main instigator, her estranged husband

Erin Patterson described estranged husband as ‘coercive’ and in-laws as ‘demanding’, trial hears – as it happened​


Simon Patterson answers questions about ‘inflammatory’ messages from Erin

Nanette Rogers SC
is now re-examining Simon.

Simon says his mother agreed to not read the messages sent from Erin to reduce the anxiety she had about being diagnosed with encephalitis.

He says the “inflammatory” message was a few months after the previous messages shown to the court from December 2022.

He recalls at the time his son was very tired while staying with him. He subsequently asked Erin to help his son get to bed earlier. He says Erin sent a reply to the group chat on Signal with his parents

“I tell you what, if mum had of read that, I don’t know what that would have done to her,” he says.

Asked by Rogers what was “inflammatory” about the messages, Simon says:

“It was having a crack at me and accusing me of some things in response to what I’d messaged her about. That’s not the bit I objected to. It was the fact she’d sent it, especially to my … knowing mum’s condition and what that can do to mum … I’m still upset about that.”

Crown Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC
View image in fullscreen
Crown Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC re-examined Simon Patterson on Monday morning. Photograph: Martin Keep/AFP/Getty ImagesShare

Mandy concludes cross-examination of Simon Patterson

Mandy tells Simon that the messages he has shown Simon today are the “only messages” about the payment of school fees.

Simon has characterised Erin as “inflammatory” and “aggressive” during a dispute over the children’s school fees, jurors are told.

Simon says the message he is thinking of has not been shown today.

Mandy concludes his cross-examination.

Barrister Colin Mandy arrives at court
View image in fullscreen
Barrister Colin Mandy SC has finished his cross-examination of Erin Patterson’s estranged husband, Simon. Photograph: James Ross/AAP

Group text messages shown in court

Mandy asks Simon about his characterisation of Erin as “aggressive” in her messages during a financial dispute about their children in December 2022. The messages were made in a group chat with Erin, Simon and his parents, Don and Gail, the court heard.

Mandy reminds Simon the defence rejects this characterisation of Erin’s message and then shows the courtroom text messages between 4 December and 17 December 2022.

In a group chat on the messaging platform Signal, Gail Patterson writes on 4 December:

Hi Erin, it would be lovely if we could catch up with you, [our son] and [our daughter] before you go to NZ please. Would you be free next Saturday or Sunday lunch or tea? Love Don and Gail.
Erin replies on 4 December:

I’m sorry, but I can’t stop thinking about the comment that Don made on the phone, that the financial issues are probably easily solved and that Simon can “reverse the single thing in his tax return.” That is mind boggling in its implication, if that’s really what he said he would do.

“Revering the single thing” is basically telling the government that Simon and I are not separated any more, and that we are still married and living together as a couple and shared finances, so that they consider our income as a whole.

The immediate implication of that would be that I can no longer get family tax benefit ... Now I have no income from a job because I quit to care for the kids … and if he “reverses the single thing” then I’ll not be able to claim family tax benefit and I’ll not be entitled to any child support …

Simon is hiding behind the communication from the government that now that I have made a child support claim, he doesn’t have to pay any bills outside it.

That is an instruction for people who want to be a bare minimum parent …
On the same day, Don replies:

Sorry I may have misled you Erin. I regret possibly making a false presentation of Simon’s opinions. That is why I immediately withdrew it …
Erin on the 6 December writes in the group chat:

Thanks Don. I understand your position and that you and Gail don’t want to be involved in certain aspects of these difficulties as it is uncomfortable and awkward …..
She says Simon is “under the misapprehension” that a child support assessment covers “every expense for the children under the sun.”

Under cross-examination, Simon says he remembers the messages. But he says “this is not what I had in mind” when he describes Erin as “aggressive” in messages.



 
She hated Simon and, due to his family taking his side, when things went south, she built up resentment about their involvement and decided to take care of things.

It must have been highly frustrating to be married to somebody she deemed lazy and not pulling his weight financially and then having your feelings rejected, but that still doesn't give you the right to take matters into your own hands.

MOO
 
We still don’t know if that’s linked. Highly likely of course, but the charges were dropped due to insufficient evidence.

The nightshade family were mentioned in WS. Allergy?
It just seems like such a huge coincidence that all the members of his family fell into comas after eating her cooking.

And the theory in Simon's serious illness is very similar to the luncheon poisoning----he said it was said to be from green potatoes---in other words foods that seem natural and wholesome but are secretly very toxic.

It just seems like too big of a coincidence to me. And I also believe that is why he didn't accept her lunch invitation. He probably did believe she was targeting him but I don't think he had any idea she would go after his elderly family members.
 
It just seems like such a huge coincidence that all the members of his family fell into comas after eating her cooking.

And the theory in Simon's serious illness is very similar to the luncheon poisoning----he said it was said to be from green potatoes---in other words foods that seem natural and wholesome but are secretly very toxic.

It just seems like too big of a coincidence to me. And I also believe that is why he didn't accept her lunch invitation. He probably did believe she was targeting him but I don't think he had any idea she would go after his elderly family members.


Yep, as he believed she was very close to his Dad, Don, so I don’t believe in his wildest dreams that she would hurt them deliberately. I mean who does this?!
 
It just seems like such a huge coincidence that all the members of his family fell into comas after eating her cooking.

And the theory in Simon's serious illness is very similar to the luncheon poisoning----he said it was said to be from green potatoes---in other words foods that seem natural and wholesome but are secretly very toxic.

It just seems like too big of a coincidence to me. And I also believe that is why he didn't accept her lunch invitation. He probably did believe she was targeting him but I don't think he had any idea she would go after his elderly family members.

I agree that it does sound like the three previous incidents were related, though it's important to consider what was said, and the context. Green potatoes were not mentioned by Simon, or by the 'source' quoted by the media.

A source close to the family addressed the 2022 illness, telling the Herald Sun Simon thought he ingested poison “through nightshade plants”

This is now third-hand information, as in it relies on Simon's interpretation of what might have happened to him, the source's interpretation of Simon's words, and then the reporter's interpretation of the source's words. So it becomes like Chinese whispers.

"Nightshades" is a broad group of plants that includes Potatoes, Tomatoes, Eggplant, and a bunch of non-edible plants.

Some inferred that "Nightshades" meant green potatoes might be involved. The Solanine produced by green potatoes could certainly give one an upset tummy, but unlikely to put one in a coma.
I imagine that if Simon suspected green potatoes, he likely would have described it as "green potatoes", rather than "Nightshades".

Others inferred a Nightshades (plant group) allergy, which again might cause an upset tummy after eating potatoes/tomatoes. That allergy is seriously rare, and rarely serious.

It's also possible that Simon suspected ingestion of "Deadly Nightshades", this is another plant in the Nightshades group (there are hundreds), except this one has very poisonous berries. Originally native to Europe, it can now be found throughout Victoria/NSW and has been used throughout history in various poisonings. This one seems much more likely to me. Vomiting, diarrhoea, delirium, seizures, coma and death are all possibilities when one consumes the tiny berries of Deadly Nightshades.

In the end, neither Simon or the Authorities know what might have caused those mystery illnesses.
One can certainly infer that it now seems likely that Erin was involved.
But one can also infer that the attempted murder charges in relation to those incidences were likely dropped because it simply can't be proven this late in the game.

Edited to add source to earlier media statement.
 
Last edited:
Unless there's something very remarkable about them, there's no way I could ever describe other people's dinner plates. Even when I've just eaten off them. Maybe I'll take more notice now...
My daughter-in-law served a nice lunch this afternoon for her mother and I for Mother's Day. I did take special note of the plates--all 5 were the same colour---a pale yellow.

But I did kind of wince when I saw it was Chicken Mar Sala---a huge plate of fresh mushrooms! 😳

I quickly wracked my brain---were she and my son still in love? Had she taken out any insurance policies on me or her mother? OK, her plate is identical to the others---but maybe I should switch it with mine quickly, just in case....Oh good, she served my granddaughter mushrooms too---I guess everything is fine...
 
My daughter-in-law served a nice lunch this afternoon for her mother and I for Mother's Day. I did take special note of the plates--all 5 were the same colour---a pale yellow.

But I did kind of wince when I saw it was Chicken Mar Sala---a huge plate of fresh mushrooms! 😳

Let us know if you're still alive in the morning 🤣
 
There were a few times I’ve wondered about Simon, the refusal to split the surgery costs was a red flag for me, referring back to the child support discussion. Those costs aren’t covered by child support. I sensed some petty games and Erin’s frustration, for some, they can be never ending.

The son dropped home after the movies while the daughter stayed, I also wondered whether the son was stepping back, it seems he was aware and perhaps was starting to resent Simon.

Simon is the victim, he lost his parents and Aunt… but I felt he embellished the positive statements about Erin on his first day, to win the jury over, the second day was closer to his natural behaviour and less complementary. A practicing Christian is not enough to put him in the Mr Nice Guy category.

Left field I know but I wonder whether there was any initial investigation to determine whether she could have been setup. He sounds like he had access to the house. He knew she used ground mushrooms.
Back at the start of the case, people suggested that maybe someone placed lethal dried mushrooms in her pantry. And unbeknownst to her, she randomly used them that day and poisoned her loved ones.

At the time, I was open to the possibility. But now, there is too much incriminating evidence against her specifically, for that theory to hold water. IMO

Her defense team has admitted she foraged for the mushrooms but was afraid to admit it. And they found traces of the toxins on the dehydrator she tipped. And she bragged on FB about practicing sneaking mushroom powder into everything.

So that alternate theory is out the window now. IMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
74
Guests online
506
Total visitors
580

Forum statistics

Threads
625,548
Messages
18,505,952
Members
240,811
Latest member
NJbystander
Back
Top