Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #9 *Arrest*

[Jess D]

I believe she was looking up something along the lines of bank statements, credit card records etc to find the transaction for the "Asian store mushrooms", to find out when/where they were purchased.

When she found no record, she claimed she must have paid cash.

But she foraged the death caps.

 

[SouthAussie]

Does that mean that doctors would be treating the patients differently if they knew the mushrooms were foraged as opposed to being bought from a little grocery store?
Even by Erin saying she foraged mushrooms, there is still a possibilty they're not death cap mushrooms isn't there? My point is that the doctors have the same information to work with, regardless.
Perhaps I'm missing something, which is not unusual...

If they knew WHERE Erin had foraged they might have had a better idea of what they were dealing with.

Eg: Yellow staining mushrooms grow in lawns, gardens, sometimes picnic areas. Death Caps grow around the base of (oak) trees.

 

[Eloise]

Allegedly

there's no allegedly about the lying about the mushrooms. She has admitted to that. Her defence has said so.

At this point the only alleged is that it was deliberate rather than accidental.

 

[katydid23]

Regardless of the fact that Erin didn't tell the truth about some of the mushrooms being foraged, have we seen any evidence that says the doctors would have treated the patient's health differently, with the information?

Yes:

​

Toxicologist raises possibility of death cap poisoning​

Dr Beth Morgan started suspecting a toxin- likely ingestion of amanita phalloides by 10:30pm on Sunday night 30th July when she first called the toxicologist who asked to find out more about what was served at the lunch

About 10:30pm, Dr Morgan says she texted the toxicology department, who ordered her to find out more about what was served at lunch.

"I was concerned that this wasn't just gastroenteritis caused by food poisoning," Dr Morgan says.

"There was a discussion about the presentation and how it was quite severe, but the onset of symptoms was quite delayed.

"This would be more indicative of a serious toxin syndrome as opposed to a food poisoning."

Dr Morgan says the toxicologist on call told her that if it was a toxin poisoning, it was most likely due to the ingestion of the amanita phalloides (death cap mushroom) toxin.

Hospital refrains from administering antidote​

As advised by toxicologists, Don was put onto a range of treatments including N-acetylcysteine (NAC), a liver-protecting drug used in cases of paracetemol overdose.

However, Dr Morgan says the hospital did not immediately administer silibinin, an antidote to death cap mushrooms.

"At that time we had no evidence that anyone else was unwell, or that anyone else was experiencing the metabolic acidosis," she tells the court.

Due to her symptoms and normal readings on VBG tests, Gail was not given as intensive medical care as Don, with doctors believing her illness to be food poisoning.

In the early hours of the morning, Dr Morgan contacted Leongatha Hospital and asked them to conduct VBG tests on Ian and Heather Wilkinson.

At about 12:22am, fresh VBG tests showed that Gail was now also showing elevated lactate levels.

The emergency room doctor also contacted the toxicologist, who recommended a repeat of liver function tests, and the administering of NAC if necessary.

 

[katydid23]

Because we aren't going to know what her motive was, I feel that it will be easier for her defence to get an acquittal for her, despite the evidence.

I don't think so because the judge's instructions will order them not to do so.

There are explicit, step by step instructions with specific questions to be answered, one after the other.

There will be no questions concerning motive. It will be about evidence of intent, etc.

 

[katydid23]

I also wanted to add: why would anyone be on their phone while child protection is asking you if you allegedly foraged mushrooms used in the dish?

"Cripps says she asked Patterson if she picked the mushrooms used in the dish.

Prosecutor Sarah Lenthall asks Cripps if Patterson answered the question.

Cripps says she did not. She says Patterson was on her phone when she asked the question."

Erin Patterson trial day 12 – as it happened

This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

Allegedly, she was scrolling through her bank records, looking for the purchase of the Asian mushrooms. That was just an act to appear helpful.

Now we know there was no purchase so she was just pretending to be helpful and she was ignoring that important question, which could have saved those lives.

 

[SouthAussie]

"A motive is not one of the four elements of murder that needs to be proven.

The four elements to murder are:

1.Did Erin Patterson cause the deaths of the lunch guests? If the jury is satisfied of that, they can move on to number two;
2.Did she do it deliberately? If they're satisfied of that, then they need to look at;
3.Did she do it with an intention to kill them or to cause really serious injury — emphasis on the word really. If they're satisfied of that, we get to the final point;
4.Did she commit the killing without a lawful justification or excuse, such as in self-defense, which is not relevant to this case.

Justice Christopher Beale said to the jury that one of the key points in this trial was going to be that point number three — did she do it with an intention to kill or cause serious injury?"

Mushroom expert quizzed on death cap identification in Erin Patterson trial — as it happened

An internationally recognised fungi expert has given evidence in the trial of Erin Patterson, who is accused of murdering three relatives with a poisoned beef Wellington meal. Look back at how the day unfolded in our live blog.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Jess D]

"A motive is not one of the four elements of murder that needs to be proven.

The four elements to murder are:

1.Did Erin Patterson cause the deaths of the lunch guests? If the jury is satisfied of that, they can move on to number two;
2.Did she do it deliberately? If they're satisfied of that, then they need to look at;
3.Did she do it with an intention to kill them or to cause really serious injury — emphasis on the word really. If they're satisfied of that, we get to the final point;
4.Did she commit the killing without a lawful justification or excuse, such as in self-defense, which is not relevant to this case.

Justice Christopher Beale said to the jury that one of the key points in this trial was going to be that point number three — did she do it with an intention to kill or cause serious injury?"

Mushroom expert quizzed on death cap identification in Erin Patterson trial — as it happened

An internationally recognised fungi expert has given evidence in the trial of Erin Patterson, who is accused of murdering three relatives with a poisoned beef Wellington meal. Look back at how the day unfolded in our live blog.

www.abc.net.au

I hope that I'm wrong, but I feel that Number 3 is going to be the hard one to prove...

 

[katydid23]

"A motive is not one of the four elements of murder that needs to be proven.

The four elements to murder are:

1.Did Erin Patterson cause the deaths of the lunch guests? If the jury is satisfied of that, they can move on to number two;

I think there is solid evidence of number one.

2.Did she do it deliberately? If they're satisfied of that, then they need to look at;

Deliberately? That might be a sticking point. How can they prove it was intentional for sure?

3.Did she do it with an intention to kill them or to cause really serious injury — emphasis on the word really. If they're satisfied of that, we get to the final point;

I think the term 'Death Caps' speaks volumes.

4.Did she commit the killing without a lawful justification or excuse, such as in self-defense, which is not relevant to this case.

Justice Christopher Beale said to the jury that one of the key points in this trial was going to be that point number three — did she do it with an intention to kill or cause serious injury?"

I am kind of surprised that the Judge thought this was the key question for them. I'd think number 2 was. IMO

Mushroom expert quizzed on death cap identification in Erin Patterson trial — as it happened

An internationally recognised fungi expert has given evidence in the trial of Erin Patterson, who is accused of murdering three relatives with a poisoned beef Wellington meal. Look back at how the day unfolded in our live blog.

www.abc.net.au

 

[SouthAussie]

I hope that I'm wrong, but I feel that Number 3 is going to be the hard one to prove...

The way I see it is that while no specific motive will be provided, there have been at least several possible/probable motives heard already.

I don't think the judge has said that the jury can't consider what they feel may be a motive - unless that happens in the jury's deliberation instructions.

So if they do each consider a motive (of their own thought) they might be able to arrive at their own answer to #3.

 

[katydid23]

I hope that I'm wrong, but I feel that Number 3 is going to be the hard one to prove...

Really? I'm not as worried about this one because she could have saved them all on Monday in the hospital. If she didn't intend to kill them, she had several opportunities to save them by telling the truth.

OR she could have said she served foraged mushrooms and accidentally poisoned them---but she could SAVE them by telling the doctors.

But she lied the entire time. So I think that establishes the answer to number 3.

 

[HoneyBunOne]

But she foraged the death caps.

I know, but at this stage she was still going with the "Asian store" scenario, and that's why she was trying to find the transaction. Of course there was no transaction, she was just playing her role. That was why she was looking at her phone instead of paying full attention to the person questioning her.

 

[Jess D]

I know, but at this stage she was still going with the "Asian store" scenario, and that's why she was trying to find the transaction. Of course there was no transaction, she was just playing her role. That was why she was looking at her phone instead of paying full attention to the person questioning her.

Yes, of course. When she was living in Glen Waverley, she may have even shopped at an Asian Grocers there, but not on this occasion...

 

[Jess D]

Really? I'm not as worried about this one because she could have saved them all on Monday in the hospital. If she didn't intend to kill them, she had several opportunities to save them by telling the truth.

OR she could have said she served foraged mushrooms and accidentally poisoned them---but she could SAVE them by telling the doctors.

But she lied the entire time. So I think that establishes the answer to number 3.

Yes, that shows intent. If she had foraged for the mushrooms and had nothing to hide, you think she would have mentioned it at the hospital. Who dries mushrooms and uses them, as well as using fresh mushrooms from Woollies anyway?

 

[HoneyBunOne]

I think there is solid evidence of number one.

Deliberately? That might be a sticking point. How can they prove it was intentional for sure?


I think the term 'Death Caps' speaks volumes.


I am kind of surprised that the Judge thought this was the key question for them. I'd think number 2 was. IMO

Bold by me. 100% yes! She was a seasoned forager, who so far, had not managed to kill anyone with her inaccurate choice of mushrooms. She certainly may have tried a time or 3 prior though. She also was considered quite good at foraging by at least one friend. She also had several books on the subject of mushrooms and/or foraging.

As for point #2 -Did she do it deliberately?- I'd certainly argue that it was deliberate. Surely it couldn't just be another coincidence that Erin, her 2 children and her dog did not get a portion that had death caps, yet all her guests got a deadly portion? Including 1 spare serve for Simon, that miraculously didn't become part of the leftovers her kids were served the day after. It's not like it was just 1 mushroom spread across the whole meal - or the whole tainted serves. It was roughly 50gm required per person to kill them, so potentially 250gm of death caps (4 guests, plus Simon) Coupled with her visiting sites just days after death caps were reported there, buying a dehydrator at the same time, changing the recipe she used so the serves were individual, getting the guests there under false pretences, making sure the kids weren't there, and feigning her own mild gut issues that proved not to be death cap mushroom related. I'd suggest this all points to deliberate.

Coroner warns of dangers of consuming wild mushrooms

Wednesday 30 October

coronerscourt.vic.gov.au

 

[Jess D]

Bold by me. 100% yes! She was a seasoned forager, who so far, had not managed to kill anyone with her inaccurate choice of mushrooms. She certainly may have tried a time or 3 prior though. She also was considered quite good at foraging by at least one friend. She also had several books on the subject of mushrooms and/or foraging.

As for point #2 -Did she do it deliberately?- I'd certainly argue that it was deliberate. Surely it couldn't just be another coincidence that Erin, her 2 children and her dog did not get a portion that had death caps, yet all her guests got a deadly portion? Including 1 spare serve for Simon, that miraculously didn't become part of the leftovers her kids were served the day after. It's not like it was just 1 mushroom spread across the whole meal - or the whole tainted serves. It was roughly 50gm required per person to kill them, so potentially 250gm of death caps (4 guests, plus Simon) Coupled with her visiting sites just days after death caps were reported there, buying a dehydrator at the same time, changing the recipe she used so the serves were individual, getting the guests there under false pretences, making sure the kids weren't there, and feigning her own mild gut issues that proved not to be death cap mushroom related. I'd suggest this all points to deliberate.

Coroner warns of dangers of consuming wild mushrooms

Wednesday 30 October

coronerscourt.vic.gov.au

All of the points you make are valid, but I don't have a lot of faith in the intelligence of juries, I'm afraid.

 

[Bats]

I think there was a delay in diagnosing possible death cap poisoning due to a lack of accurate information. From testimony:

Expert says Erin Patterson's medical files suggest she was ill — as it happened

Erin Patterson is on trial charged with the murders of three relatives who died after eating a meal she prepared which contained poisonous mushrooms. Follow the trial in our live blog.

www.abc.net.au

On July 31, 2023, Dr Truong was the on-call mycologist and received a call from Dr Muldoon at Monash Health (who we heard from yesterday).

Dr Truong says she was informed about a possible poisoning case involving four people and was asked to help identify mushrooms.

Dr Truong says she told Dr Muldoon it was "probably impossible" to be death cap mushrooms, due to them only growing in the wild and being unable to be cultivated.

But weren't health officials preparing to treat the patients with death cap poisoning before they'd even spoken to Erin about the origin of the mushrooms?

 

[Kemug]

Maybe she didn't anticipate them finding Death Cap DNA in the meal...

Actually, I don't believe I knew that Death Caps have DNA. Maybe I'm the King of Stupid.

 

[Jess D]

If they knew WHERE Erin had foraged they might have had a better idea of what they were dealing with.

Eg: Yellow staining mushrooms grow in lawns, gardens, sometimes picnic areas. Death Caps grow around the base of (oak) trees.

And she was in one of the precise locations where the expert had posted about Death Caps being there...

 

[Kemug]

Losing custody of her children may just be the best thing that ever happened to them.