GUILTY Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 *Arrest* #19

[drsleuth]

Exactly! That doesn't sound at all like Food Poisoning "gastro" or even IBS/Crohn's disease. Especially when it always occurred after eating her food. Wonder if she was taking him to different hospitals each time to avoid them putting the pieces together. Was he seeing a GI doctor?

This ruling has ALOT of info re Simon's illness's

Ruling 6

R v Patterson (Ruling 6) [2025] VSC 108 (14 March 2025)

 

[JBowie]

This ruling has ALOT of info re Simon's illness's

Ruling 6

R v Patterson (Ruling 6) [2025] VSC 108 (14 March 2025)

Ruling:

25. Would the jurors in the present case be as rigorous in applying the criminal standard of proof as they should be, if they formed the view that the accused had deliberately and fatally poisoned Simon Patterson’s mother, father and aunt and had deliberately and nearly fatally poisoned his uncle? Would the jurors be able to dispassionately assess the evidence specific to Charges 1–3 and pay full heed to the limitations of the medical evidence regarding the possible causes of Simon Patterson’s severe illnesses. Moreover, would the jurors be able to resist rank propensity reasoning such as ‘he deliberately poisoned Simon Patterson’s parents, uncle and aunty: isn’t it likely, then, that she deliberately poisoned Simon Patterson?’ All of these dangers or risks could, of course, be the subject of directions, but the guiding principle that jurors can generally be trusted to abide by directions admits of exceptions. Even if the impugned evidence is credited with significant probative value, I am not persuaded that its probative value substantially outweighs the significant danger or risk of unfair prejudice to the accused.

26. As agreed by the parties, my ruling that the coincidence evidence is inadmissible means that there must be two trials — one in respect of Charges 1–3 and one in respect of Charges 4–7. Pursuant to s 193 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic), I order severance of the indictment as it would be unfair to hear all the charges together.

 

[Little Jack]

I think its relevant to mention the husband of kouri Richards I believe her name is- the lady who allegedly poisoned her husband then wrote a children's book about grief- as he was so suspicious that she was trying to poison him in think he mentioned it to a friend and changed all his will etc to be in care of his sister. Yet he continued to live with his wife and accepted the fatal drink from her. (Apologies if I have misremembered any details)

I cant imagine the self doubt from such an insane situation and all the manipulation and gaslighting that goes with it. I agree with those who say hindsight is 20 20 but at the moment it would be very difficult for Simon to have moved beyond suspicion to certainty. Its a wild accusation that would tear apart the family with finality, and dont forget Erin was already telling the kids that Simon did bad things and upset her. He could have lost a lot making such a claim with no solid proof, and was counseled as such by his doctor and his father.

Of course once she killed everyone there was no more doubt but then it was far too late.

I am.not sure what they all could have said ... "sorry to hear youre having a serious health crisis and want to get the family together but we refuse to eat your cooking?" Having a touchy in law myself im sure they were all on eggshells to avoid her moods and mass murder was not on anyone's radar.

 

[LinasK]

It's easy now with 20/20 hindsight to say that it was poison. But it wouldn't have been the obvious diagnosis at the time. The doctors must have thought there was something systematically wrong with Simon. Also every time he got sick, the symptoms were different. So, it wouldn't have been at all apparent that he was being fed different poisons, each with different effects.

How many magazine articles, tv programs, and movies are about a person going from doctor to doctor because no one can explain their symptoms? Often in these stories it turns out they have a rare or unknown condition that was difficult to diagnose. That was probably what the doctors were thinking was going on with Simon.

Because it always happened after eating her food. At some point, you put 2 and 2 together.

I think its relevant to mention the husband of kouri Richards I believe her name is- the lady who allegedly poisoned her husband then wrote a children's book about grief- as he was so suspicious that she was trying to poison him in think he mentioned it to a friend and changed all his will etc to be in care of his sister. Yet he continued to live with his wife and accepted the fatal drink from her. (Apologies if I have misremembered any details)

I cant imagine the self doubt from such an insane situation and all the manipulation and gaslighting that goes with it. I agree with those who say hindsight is 20 20 but at the moment it would be very difficult for Simon to have moved beyond suspicion to certainty. Its a wild accusation that would tear apart the family with finality, and dont forget Erin was already telling the kids that Simon did bad things and upset her. He could have lost a lot making such a claim with no solid proof, and was counseled as such by his doctor and his father.

Of course once she killed everyone there was no more doubt but then it was far too late.

I am.not sure what they all could have said ... "sorry to hear youre having a serious health crisis and want to get the family together but we refuse to eat your cooking?" Having a touchy in law myself im sure they were all on eggshells to avoid her moods and mass murder was not on anyone's radar.

No, you don't tell her that you refuse to eat her cooking- unless you're going to confront her about her previous attempts to poison your son. You either refuse to go, or beg off eating by saying you're full, you've already eaten... I'd have refused to go.

 

[Detechtive]

Because it always happened after eating her food. At some point, you put 2 and 2 together.

No, you don't tell her that you refuse to eat her cooking- unless you're going to confront her about her previous attempts to poison your son. You either refuse to go, or beg off eating by saying you're full, you've already eaten... I'd have refused to go.

I suppose. Or invite her for coffee and cake at a cafe.

 

[Ellery84]

To put it mildly!

Well yeah I’m just trying to be factual and not hyperbolic.

 

[Little Jack]

I assume those who say they would not have attended also would have believed Simon when be said he thought he may have been poisoned. I am working from the opinion that Don/ any others who were aware of Simon's suspicions brushed it off as too incredible to believe until they felt sick themselves.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Did it happen every time he ate EP's food, or just sometimes? How much time passed between eating the food and getting sick? What other health issues was he having at the same time? All questions that could affect how easy it was to recognize the pattern.

I mean, Simon seems like a pretty smart guy. And I'm sure his doctors were pretty intelligent too. If it took them a while to connect the dots, then I trust that it wasn't as obvious as everyone here seems to think it was.

With all due respect, thinking that this was something that should have been quickly detected is textbook hindsight bias.

Hindsight bias - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Do you have doubts about EP poisoning Simon?

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Inside Erin Patterson’s family life a decade before her notorious mushroom murders​

Inside Erin Patterson’s family life a decade before her notorious mushroom murders

Photos reveal the Patterson family’s stunning Australian outback trip of a lifetime before their marriage broke down.

7news.com.au

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Just released new video on Erin Patterson's police interview from The Behaviour Panel.

 

[Charlot123]

Did it happen every time he ate EP's food, or just sometimes? How much time passed between eating the food and getting sick? What other health issues was he having at the same time? All questions that could affect how easy it was to recognize the pattern.

I mean, Simon seems like a pretty smart guy. And I'm sure his doctors were pretty intelligent too. If it took them a while to connect the dots, then I trust that it wasn't as obvious as everyone here seems to think it was.

With all due respect, thinking that this was something that should have been quickly detected is textbook hindsight bias.

Hindsight bias - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Poisons don't give a well-known syndrome. Often so many systems are involved that people first end up in infection unit. And then maybe the blood shows some spike, and a hem/onc is invited. And then there is inflammation, so a rheumatologist is invited to have a look, and a neurologist. Poisoning is often the diagnosis of exclusion. Say, the doctors are thinking of an infection and asking, have you been to any new restaurant, and suddenly Simon says, no, each time I ate meals in my wife's house.

 

[dothetime]

I suppose. Or invite her for coffee and cake at a cafe.

And keep a close eye out for
any sleight-of-hand!

 

[Charlot123]

Do you have doubts about EP poisoning Simon?

I don't. I am absolutely positive that she tried to poison him.

Not only does Simon feel grief (and lots of other feelings), how does one even start processing that a woman that you have loved and trusted...trusted in fact so much that you allowed her to nurse you back to health, consistently tried to poison you? He has all these past memories of their life together, and then, this...Just wishing him the best.

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Just released new video on Erin Patterson's police interview from The Behaviour Panel.

The Behaviour Panel are right. The only time Erin Patterson showed any form of emotion, if you could call it that, was when the policeman told her that Don had been given a liver transplant and was still alive, but seriously ill. She raised her eyebrows in surprise, surprise that Don was still alive...

 

[Monstradamus]

Just released new video on Erin Patterson's police interview from The Behaviour Panel.

Thanks @Jess D
That was an interesting view.
She was so cool and calm during that interview, until she wasn't.
Showed no emotion when being told about the victims, only surprised when she was told Don had undergone a liver transplant. Probably secretly hoped there would be no witnesses remaining to tell the tale.
If I had been on the Jury, watching that police interview would have made me question her "accident" theory.
I'm no behaviour analyst, but I can tell she's lying, and giving unnecessary extra details when answering.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Thanks @Jess D
That was an interesting view.
She was so cool and calm during that interview, until she wasn't.
Showed no emotion when being told about the victims, only surprised when she was told Don had undergone a liver transplant. Probably secretly hoped there would be no witnesses remaining to tell the tale.
If I had been on the Jury, watching that police interview would have made me question her "accident" theory.
I'm no behaviour analyst, but I can tell she's lying, and giving unnecessary extra details when answering.

Also there's places where we know she's lying as the story changed - for example she states she'd never dehydrated or preserved food. That's how easily she lies when we see this.

 

[Monstradamus]

Also there's places where we know she's lying as the story changed - for example she states she'd never dehydrated or preserved food. That's how easily she lies when we see this.

It's second nature to her, happens so easily.
I can't stand liars. I wonder if she modelled that behaviour to her children? "Lie to get what you want, kids!"
I hope not.

 

[Tortoise]

I think it raises an interesting point, that we tend not to use our instincts very much, or think that we can't really detect when someone is lying.

I don't know if there was a time when we ever did, maybe we did when we had to rely on our instincts about what foods were safe to eat as foragers and hunter gatherers, but I think certainly in modern times there is a kind of message that pervades society that it is like believing in something mystical and not a real thing to have a bad instinct about something. It leads to us not trusting our innate wisdom, I believe. We are closed to our full range of intelligent senses (IMO).

Of course I'm not suggesting that we rush to judgment about people but we could do better at being more inquisitive and quietly checking things out, and trusting when others say something disquieting that they didn't just make a huge baseless assumption, and not shutting down our own sense that sometimes something isn't right. If we're wrong then so what, we didn't confront or convict anyone, we just better protected ourselves and others until we investigated and learned more about a situation.

It happened in the Letby nurse serial killer case, and in countless other cases, and then we say well hindsight is a great thing, but there were lots of signs and the doctors kept telling themselves effectively that they could not trust their training and experience and even medical results, that something was terribly wrong, nurses are all good, even though we know they are not, and so they shouldn't act on it. How many children could be saved if someone listened to the cries or said that child is always bruised, let's pay more attention before something else happens.

IMO

 

[Deleted member 363451]

Also there's places where we know she's lying as the story changed - for example she states she'd never dehydrated or preserved food. That's how easily she lies when we see this.

She didn't realise that the police already had the footage of her dumping her dehydrator...

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

It's second nature to her, happens so easily.
I can't stand liars. I wonder if she modelled that behaviour to her children? "Lie to get what you want, kids!"
I hope not.

I would imagine that since she was their primary care-giver and they were more or less in her full time care, plus their father had been so incredibly unwell and at near death even, she would have been the person raising them the vast majority of time.

In that regard then it's highly likely they're either very confused young people who are victims of someone who gaslights, switches, coerces, manipulates, lies, deceives, which is dizzying and disorienting to experience in any circumstances let alone formative years. OR they're confused young people who mimic what they've seen and find difficulties arising. I suspect it's the first -but- far worse for the female child as girls look to their mothers and female influences around them for role modelling and boys look to their peers, fathers, and other men. So the boy likely had it easier, plus he's born and raised within a patriarchy in the western model that empowers boys and men above girls and women.

It's very sad Probable that a confused, disoriented, suffering young girl has lost her primary carer but also been psychologically abused by same.

JMO MOO