GUILTY Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 *Arrest* #18

[JBowie]

Her lawyers say they will appeal against her convictions

IMO, any lawyer who would take on an appeal of those convictions is just taking money for going through the motions.

 

[MaxDecimus13]

IMO, SP was given bad advice all round. It's tragic that no one he consulted was suspiciously cynical (as for instance I am) when it comes to this sort of thing.

Those people outside of her closed family group who really knew EP's personality would have heard alarm bells ringing, IMO.

All I would say in this respect is that attempted murder is not something most people would naturally go to. It is such an extreme occurrence that it would be easy to dismiss.

If you remove the individual circumstances, natural reasons are more likely.

 

[Detechtive]

I recall when she tried to poison him with the cookies from her daughter. What a horrible evil woman who would rope a kid into trying to kill their own parent.
Those poor poor children.

I am so glad the comparisons to Lindy Chamberlain may finally cease now, and that the 'innocent rights activists' can finally see what an evil intentionally murderous woman they were viewing through rose coloured glasses once and for all.

 

[JBowie]

It is such an extreme occurrence that it would be easy to dismiss.

I could not disagree more. Exactly the opposite IMO.

 

[JBowie]

I recall when she tried to poison him with the cookies from her daughter. What a horrible evil woman who would rope a kid into trying to kill their own parent. It was a fathers day cookie gift! Evil!
Those poor poor children.

IMO, the writing was well and truly on the wall for SP the day she abandoned him with a small baby and flew back to Perth alone.

 

[Detechtive]

All I would say in this respect is that attempted murder is not something most people would naturally go to. It is such an extreme occurrence that it would be easy to dismiss.

If you remove the individual circumstances, natural reasons are more likely.

I think we finally agree, Max.

Add that to that Simon was 'salt of the earth' - you know, the types of people who haven't experienced really horrid people in this world, and the fact he was a victim of DV and coercive control, and you have the perfect mechanism for denial in such extreme circumstances. IMO

 

[Detechtive]

IMO, the writing was well and truly on the wall for SP the day she abandoned him with a small baby and flew back to Perth.

Agreed, however, these things can be explained by all manner of nonsense, like "post partum depression". Rubbish, IMO. It clearly shows that she had no attachment to her infant child and not due to PPD. More like sociopathy.

Also, the fact he was from a normal family who valued strong familial connection and probably no divorce, you can see why he hung in for so long, IMO.

 

[MaxDecimus13]

I could not disagree more. Exactly the opposite IMO.

If somebody suffers a sudden unexplained illness, I don't think most people think attempted murder is the likely cause.

Even if Simon had said so, I think most people would more likely see his accusations as the result of a nasty breakup rather than her actually trying to murder him.

 

[JBowie]

Also, the fact he was from a normal family who valued strong familial connection and probably no divorce, you can see why he hung in for so long, IMO.

Yep, I suspect there was a fair bit of turn-the-other-cheek involved. Too much IMO.

 

[JBowie]

If somebody suffers a sudden unexplained illness, I don't think most people think attempted murder is the likely cause.

Even if Simon had said so, I think most people would more likely see his accusations as the result of a nasty breakup rather than her actually trying to murder him.

Once maybe, but go back and add up the episodes, and all after she prepared him a meal.

 

[MaxDecimus13]

My gut after seeing all this come out over the last few weeks, is that the balance is all wrong regarding what is admissible evidence. I'm not sure whether it was this judge or the defence did a good job or the system.

I'm very much with Simon and can understand his frustration about how what happened to him was not admissible.

EP could have got off here. It would have taken 1 person with reasonable doubt and they could have got there I think. However, had they known what we know now I don't think anybody could have got there. We now know her husband suspected her of multiple murders, she had searched poisons a number of times, she lied about having a cat that ate mushrooms etc

As an outsider, it seems more like a game based on technicalities and rules rather than a real attempt to get to the truth.

 

[Detechtive]

My gut after seeing all this come out over the last few weeks, is that the balance is all wrong regarding what is admissible evidence. I'm not sure whether it was this judge or the defence did a good job or the system.

I'm very much with Simon and can understand his frustration about how what happened to him was not admissible.

EP could have got off here. It would have taken 1 person with reasonable doubt and they could have got there I think. However, had they known what we know now I don't think anybody could have got there. We now know her husband suspected her of multiple murders, she had searched poisons a number of times, she lied about having a cat that ate mushrooms etc

As an outsider, it seems more like a game based on technicalities and rules rather than a real attempt to get to the truth.

In my view, the legal system tends to go too far in minimising appeals, and for understandable reasons. Some individuals, including what I see as manipulative offenders - never relent in their use of the appeals process. Cases like Kathleen Folbigg’s exemplify this. While she was convicted in 2003 for killing her four children, I believe she remains guilty and that her persistent legal efforts - supported by innocence initiatives and law students doing umpteen hours over decades of unpaid labour during their degrees to find one tiny sliver of hope or error in the prosecution or conviction, demonstrate how the system can be exploited.

These groups can spend years, even decades, poring over every detail, much like in Folbigg’s case, piecing together a narrative that brings in genetic theories or doubts about the original verdict.

<modsnip: unnecessary>

I expect that Erin will accrue extensive legal qualifications or letters after her name while behind bars, and continue to strain society with endless appeals and manipulation of the system and society.

This is why the courts must continue to err on the side of extreme caution, especially when it comes to trial evidence, its admissibility, and potential prejudices. Strong safeguards help protect the legal system from abuse and ensure that verdicts - rightly or wrongly reached - aren’t unravelled by determined legal manoeuvring. IMO

 

[JBowie]

My gut after seeing all this come out over the last few weeks, is that the balance is all wrong regarding what is admissible evidence. I'm not sure whether it was this judge or the defence did a good job or the system.

Although I can well understand SP's frustration, IMO the judge did the right thing. In trials here the accused's prior convictions -- if any -- are inadmissible on grounds that they could taint the jury whose task it is to judge the case on the evidence presented.

In a similar vein, allowing evidence in from a case that was abandoned would very likely allow the defence to walk away with a mistrial, and maybe no retrial.

 

[JBowie]

Strong safeguards help protect the legal system from abuse and ensure that verdicts - rightly or wrongly reached - aren’t unravelled by determined legal manoeuvring. IMO

I agree. When Beale was giving his instructions I gained the strong impression he was trying to steer the jury to a not guilty decision. However, as things panned-out, I believe he was making it very hard to find procedural grounds for a successful appeal.

 

[Detechtive]

I agree. When Beale was giving his instructions I gained the strong impression he was trying to steer the jury to a not guilty decision. However, as things panned-out, I believe he was making it very hard to find procedural grounds for a successful appeal.

I couldn’t agree more, and remember, what we often see is filtered through a sensationalised, clickbait prism. The way his words were presented frequently emphasised the narrative that he was steering things toward "not guilty," but that might simply be the angle chosen for engagement.

I’m familiar with numerous facts in this case, both reported and omitted, and the way they’ve been presented to the public is often wildly skewed. It’s genuinely astonishing how frequently journalists fail to fact-check or convey the full truth in the coverage of this case, especially in what has arguably become the most over‑saturated criminal case in contemporary Australian history. With countless outlets reporting on it, you'd expect more subtlety and nuance in representing the facts.

I’m eagerly awaiting the day Court TV comes to Australia, it could at least offer continuous, in‑depth courtroom coverage without the hype and clickbait so that we can discern the facts for ourselves. IMO

 

[Ellery84]

I expect that Erin will accrue extensive legal qualifications or letters after her name while behind bars, and continue to strain society with endless appeals and manipulation of the system and society.

I don’t think so. I think she will probably end up found deceased in jail. She’s got nowhere really to turn, no one to manipulate, no physical touch, no Facebook or social media with which to play with people’s lives, no painkillers to take just for fun, no car with which to drive to 4 different takeaway stores in a day to satisfy her food cravings.

She is staring down the barrel of a life with no purpose, no joy, no novelty and no meaning - with all of her prior loved ones now probably rejecting her.

I think she’ll just self-implode.

But you knew her better - I’ve don’t know her apart from the media reports of her.

IMO

 

[Scuffy35]

IMO, she deserves one of those American-style verdicts: Life plus 100 years.

She is more deserving of the death penalty in my opinion.

Lethal Injection would be a fitting one. The slower acting, like Death cap poisoning, the better.

 

[Trooper]

Erin's initial interview with those nice VICPOL chaps........

Watch Erin Patterson's police interview about deadly mushroom lunch

A police interview given by Erin Patterson after she murdered her relatives with a meal laced by poisonous death cap mushrooms has been released by Victoria's Supreme Court.

www.abc.net.au

 

[JBowie]

She is more deserving of the death penalty in my opinion.

Lethal Injection would be a fitting one. The slower acting, like Death cap poisoning, the better.

Having to eat a plate of death caps (washed down with a nice Chianti?) would be a fitting end.

 

[JBowie]

It’s genuinely astonishing how frequently journalists fail to fact-check or convey the full truth in the coverage of this case, especially in what has arguably become the most over‑saturated criminal case in contemporary Australian history. With countless outlets reporting on it, you'd expect more subtlety and nuance in representing the facts.

It doesn't surprise me a bit. IMO, for quite some time these people have been correctly referred to as churnalists.

Churnalsim [noun - disparaging]
a form of journalism that is characterized by a lack of original research and fact-checking and by reuse of existing material such as press releases.

I’m eagerly awaiting the day Court TV comes to Australia, it could at least offer continuous, in‑depth courtroom coverage without the hype and clickbait so that we can discern the facts for ourselves. IMO

I'm not in favour of court TV as IMO it can easily turn trials into absolute circuses with lawyers big noting themselves. Think OJ Simpson & DJ Trump.

However, I believe that the certified transcripts of public cases should be available to the public.