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

[Detechtive]

Dbm

 

[imstilla.grandma]

“Mushroom madness” read a recent front page of the Latrobe Valley Express, which noted under a photo of a long queue outside court, “the story making headlines around the world is being told here in the Latrobe Valley.”

Laura Heller, owner of Jay Dee’s Cafe, across the street from the court, said she’s been doing about three times her usual business since the trial began, as spectators, journalists and even jurors grab coffee and snacks between hearings.


Australian media outlets have been live-blogging every day of the trial, and public broadcaster ABC is running a special “Mushroom Case Daily” podcast. One local newspaper even published a piece highlighting all the regional landmarks referenced in the case.

Mushroom madness grips small Australian town as murder trial brings media storm

Morwell is in the spotlight as it hosts the triple-murder trial of Erin Patterson, who is accused of poisoning four people through a beef wellington lunch

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[Spectrix]

Do wewe think that the Juror 84’s phone was bugged as part of a jury member compliance covert surveillance ioeration in such a high profile trial?

About 11am on Thursday morning, Justice Christopher Beale brought the remaining 14 members into the courtroom as he told them one of their numbers had been discharged.

The judge told jurors he’d received information the juror had discussed the case with friends and family contrary to directions given to jurors at the start of the trial.

He said he formed the view the information was “credible”, but did not make a positive finding that the juror did discuss the case, only that there was a reasonable possibility it occured.

“I remind you to only discuss the case with your fellow jurrs, nott anyone else,” he said.

“On that unhappy note, we’re now ready to resume the trial.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/erin-patterson-trial-alleged-mushroom-poisoner-was-ill-intensive-care-specialist-tells-court/news-story/2a1417ea5465148399f0c13da4735ad2?amp

I suspect the answer to that question lies within the passage quoted from the judge:

"He said he formed the view that the information was credible, but did not make a positive finding that the juror did discuss the case, only that there was a reasonable possibility it occured."

It reads as if another person overheard the juror discussing the case and thought it best to report it to the court, rather than a verifiable audio recording.

 

[Ellery84]

A barrister can continue to represent someone who's told them they did it.

Regarding a person who has told their barrister they did it, but insists on pleading not guilty, from Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015:
80
A barrister briefed to appear in criminal proceedings whose client confesses guilt to the barrister but maintains a plea of not guilty:

Do you think that’s what has happened here?

 

[Eloise]

Do you think that’s what has happened here?

Nope, I don't really know what's happened behind closed doors. Who knows what she's told them, or what the barristers believe in their own minds. Who even knows what she thinks she did in her own mind. Just that if they know she did it (if she did, as alleged), they can still represent her even after pleading not guilty. There's just some conditions on their representation, because they can't lie. They can ensure she gets her legal representation, they ensure the charges are proven beyond reasonable doubt, and that the prosecution do their job properly, though.

 

[Kemug]

I don't suppose she feels any real remorse, or pity for her victims, even now. It is all about Erin, and I suspect it always has been.

 

[LenaOdenthal]

Is the offence of attempted murder considered in the same way as murder insofar as a majority verdict is insufficient to convict?

Would be an interesting situation if she could be convicted of attempted murder on the survivor but found not guilty of the three murder charges...

 

[Bats]

Is the offence of attempted murder considered in the same way as murder insofar as a majority verdict is insufficient to convict?

Would be an interesting situation if she could be convicted of attempted murder on the survivor but found not guilty of the three murder charges...

Gee that's a good question!

It would be an extremely strange situation if that happened, wouldn't it!

The jury (of 12) find her guilty (with a majority verdict of 11), of the attempted murder of Ian but are unable to find her guilty of murdering Gail, Heather and Don due to not being unanimous (as 12).

My feeling is, since all the victims were at the same lunch, the jury will be considering the 4 separate verdicts the same. So, there probably wouldn't be a 'not guilty' verdict for the murder of Don but a 'guilty' verdict for the murder of Gail, for example. Common sense would say that the same would apply to the attempted murder of Ian.

I don't think the jury would ever get to that strange predicament, even though the way I read the rules, it's technically possible.

MOO

JURIES ACT 2000 - SECT 46 Failure to reach unanimous verdict in criminal trials

classic.austlii.edu.au

 

[Detechtive]

Is the offence of attempted murder considered in the same way as murder insofar as a majority verdict is insufficient to convict?

Would be an interesting situation if she could be convicted of attempted murder on the survivor but found not guilty of the three murder charges...

I don't think that is possible.

In order to find her guilty for attempted murder, they must be satisfied that there were all of the factors of murder, but the person didn't die. Therefore, if it meets the bar for one attempted murder, they are going to deem that the others were murdered based on the same evidence.

 

[Spectrix]

I don't think that is possible.

In order to find her guilty for attempted murder, they must be satisfied that there were all of the factors of murder, but the person didn't die. Therefore, if it meets the bar for one attempted murder, they are going to deem that the others were murdered based on the same evidence.

I don't know what the requirements are in terms of needing a majority or a totality vote, but the hypothetical put forward by @LenaOdenthal is certainly interesting. The question is really about the voting requirements for conviction rather than the act itself.

In this particular case, while it looks like each guest received the same tainted wellington, and each person was intended to be killed as just much as each other, murders are not grouped together as such.

For instance, the jury might find that they could only agree to convict on Murder for Don, because he was the only one with a positive test for amatoxin, but not convict on murder for Gail and Heather, as the amatoxins had been eliminated from their bodies by the time they were tested. Ian might be different again.

 

[Bats]

Gee that's a good question!

It would be an extremely strange situation if that happened, wouldn't it!

The jury (of 12) find her guilty (with a majority verdict of 11), of the attempted murder of Ian but are unable to find her guilty of murdering Gail, Heather and Don due to not being unanimous (as 12).

My feeling is, since all the victims were at the same lunch, the jury will be considering the 4 separate verdicts the same. So, there probably wouldn't be a 'not guilty' verdict for the murder of Don but a 'guilty' verdict for the murder of Gail, for example. Common sense would say that the same would apply to the attempted murder of Ian.

I don't think the jury would ever get to that strange predicament, even though the way I read the rules, it's technically possible.

MOO

JURIES ACT 2000 - SECT 46 Failure to reach unanimous verdict in criminal trials

classic.austlii.edu.au

Replying to my own post.

"Justice Beale told the jury their verdicts would need to be unanimous"

 

[drsleuth]

did they suspect death caps already at that stage though and it was too late for treatment to work??

Would she have known if it was too late for treatment to work? If, in fact, it was too late.

(I don't know if the medical staff knew it was Death Caps for sure by Aug 2nd, or not.)

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

Toxicologist raises possibility of death cap poisoning​

By Judd Boaz​

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​

By Judd Boaz​

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.

Gail tested, then retested by hospital​

By Judd Boaz​

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.

At 1:53am, Dr Morgan reviewed Gail and spoke to her at bedside, when she discovered that Gail had only eaten half her portion of beef Wellington at lunch.

"She looked unwell and clinically dehydrated," Dr Morgan says.

At 2:08am, the results of the new liver function test arrived, showing that her liver function was worsening over time.

Yet another test showed worsening signs, and lactate levels over 5.6.

It triggered Dr Morgan to move Gail to the ICU.

Treatment ordered for Ian and Heather​

By Judd Boaz​

At 6.50am the next morning, after conversations with the toxicology department, it was suggested that doctors begin administering the antidote silibinin and the antibiotic rifampicin.

The court hears that meanwhile, Ian and Heather were still at the Leongatha Hospital and had continued vomiting all night.

Dr Morgan says doctors at Leongatha Hospital were instructed to start Ian and Heather Wilkinson on NAC, and an antibiotic.

Dr Morgan concludes her testimony​

By Judd Boaz​

Dr Morgan tells the court she received a call from a doctor, Chris Webster, at Leongatha.

He told her Erin Patterson had presented to hospital with gastro symptoms and had discharged herself.

He needed to call police about it — and Dr Morgan suggested Erin go straight to the Austin Hospital, which was where Don and Gail were headed due to the severity of their conditions.

This concludes her testimony.

Dying lunch guest's 'extremely abnormal' blood test results raised hospital alarm, court hears — as it happened

Ms Patterson is accused of murdering three relatives by serving them a beef Wellington laced with poisonous death cap mushrooms. Follow the trial in our live blog.

www.abc.net.au

It's hard to try & keep track of all the times & who knew what & when in this case.

 

[LordCyrus]

I wonder whether Erin's lawyers told her that her defence is hopeless. They should have advised her to plead guilty and avoid a trial.

This would have resulted in a lighter sentence. However for these crimes a "lighter" sentence may effectively still be the rest of her life.

Her lawyers are the only winners here.

 

[Spectrix]

I'm really not sure how Simon & Ian feel about the trial, but I find it somewhat satisfying that she's pleading her innocence and we're seeing all this damning evidence unfold, and now people all over the world are watching and learning what a completely rotten person she is.

It was a truly abhorrent crime and at this stage it's looking like she's going to get exactly what she deserves.

Allegedly/IMO etc

 

[MsMarple]

I'm really not sure how Simon & Ian feel about the trial, but I find it somewhat satisfying that she's pleading her innocence and we're seeing all this damning evidence unfold, and now people all over the world are watching and learning what a completely rotten person she is.

It was a truly abhorrent crime and at this stage it's looking like she's going to get exactly what she deserves.

Allegedly/IMO etc

Yes. At this point regardless of the trial’s outcome we’re seeing a picture of Erin as a selfish, petulant, vengeful person whose priorities are herself and her own feelings. We’ve heard that she threw the father of her children under the bus and lied to every professional who desperately sought to understand the illness of her relatives.

Erin refused to give accurate information that may have saved an additional life, maybe more. Instead she feigned illness and wasted precious time and energy telling authorities about her phony illness.

The very people who she claimed were like the family she never had died painful, horrific deaths because she made it all about herself.

Erin was so upset that people were painting her as a witch that she released a tone deaf phony baloney statement. Where did that get her? Even her own lawyers admitted she’s a liar. JMO

 

[BreakingNews]

To add to this, her barristers are not allowed to continue representing her if they know she is lying.

It’s quite the quandary for Erin, imo.

But I really don’t blame her for going to trial. Her goose was cooked! (Pardon the pun!) If she plead guilty it was a guaranteed life sentence. Going to trial means she gets to roll the dice. She only has to convince two jurors (because you only need 11 unanimous in Australia after 6 hours of deliberation) that there’s reasonable doubt to walk. I’m not sure she cares about the cost to tax payers and the trauma the trial inflicts upon her alleged loved ones, self preservation seems to be her MO.

My opinion only.

For murder, the jurors need to all agree. 6 hours is not long when deliberating. When I was a juror in a murder trial, we went through all the information the judge told us to, before we even had our first vote. That was well over 6 hours. As a juror, you have to do your due diligence. You can't just make a decision without going through all the material. Before deliberating, the Judge gives the jury a very lengthy talk on what they have to do.

A majority of 11 is sometimes allowed for manslaughter charges.

 

[Bats]

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?

 

[SouthAussie]

double post

 

[SouthAussie]

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, I think we have. I think if you re-read this post by @drsleuth (below) you will see the delays in testing and treatment. Dr Morgan had to work out by herself that the condition of the patients could be mushroom poisoning. A full 12 hours after their hospital admittance.

Gail was thought to have food poisoning, so vital treatment was withheld until they saw her liver deteriorating.

Minutes and hours count when you are fighting a poison. imo

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

Toxicologist raises possibility of death cap poisoning​

​

By Judd Boaz​

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


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​

​

​

By Judd Boaz​

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.

Gail tested, then retested by hospital​

​

By Judd Boaz​

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.

At 1:53am, Dr Morgan reviewed Gail and spoke to her at bedside, when she discovered that Gail had only eaten half her portion of beef Wellington at lunch.


At 2:08am, the results of the new liver function test arrived, showing that her liver function was worsening over time.

Yet another test showed worsening signs, and lactate levels over 5.6.

It triggered Dr Morgan to move Gail to the ICU.

Treatment ordered for Ian and Heather​

​

By Judd Boaz​

At 6.50am the next morning, after conversations with the toxicology department, it was suggested that doctors begin administering the antidote silibinin and the antibiotic rifampicin.

The court hears that meanwhile, Ian and Heather were still at the Leongatha Hospital and had continued vomiting all night.

Dr Morgan says doctors at Leongatha Hospital were instructed to start Ian and Heather Wilkinson on NAC, and an antibiotic.

Dr Morgan concludes her testimony​

​

By Judd Boaz​

Dr Morgan tells the court she received a call from a doctor, Chris Webster, at Leongatha.

He told her Erin Patterson had presented to hospital with gastro symptoms and had discharged herself.

He needed to call police about it — and Dr Morgan suggested Erin go straight to the Austin Hospital, which was where Don and Gail were headed due to the severity of their conditions.

This concludes her testimony.

Dying lunch guest's 'extremely abnormal' blood test results raised hospital alarm, court hears — as it happened

Ms Patterson is accused of murdering three relatives by serving them a beef Wellington laced with poisonous death cap mushrooms. Follow the trial in our live blog.

www.abc.net.au

It's hard to try & keep track of all the times & who knew what & when in this case.

 

[JennieM]

Yes, I think we have. I think if you re-read this post by @drsleuth (below) you will see the delays in testing and treatment. Dr Morgan had to work out by herself that the condition of the patients could be mushroom poisoning. A full 12 hours after their hospital admittance.

Gail was thought to have food poisoning, so vital treatment was withheld until they saw her liver deteriorating.

Minutes and hours count when you are fighting a poison. imo

Erin could have alerted the doctors of the possibility of mushroom poisoning. She let those people die.

Guilty as charged imo.