A few bits I found interesting for the written judgement published today ( my comments in yelloe
Footnote 7
7 -On 6 December 2022 at 1038,you sent this message to the group: ‘
I wonder if they've got any capacity for self reflection at all? I mean clearly the fact that Simon refusesto talk about personalissues in part stems from the behaviour of his parentsand how they operate, according to them they have never asked him what's goingon with us, why I keep kicking him out, ...etc, it's too awkward oruncomfortable or something. So that's his behaviour. Just don'ttalk about thisshit (sic).’
Now Erin that's a bit rich isn't it!!
From footnote 65
65. The affidavit of Ophelia Hollway of Doogue + George, solicitors, dated 18 August 2025, indicates, amongst other things that, for the last 15 months, you have been kept in a solitary cell for upwards of 22 hours per day. Your cell is approximately 4 metres by 2.5metres. Your meals and medicine are currently delivered through a flap in the cell door. There is a 2 metre by 2 metre concrete yard which adjoins your cell and by which you can access fresh air, but you require permission to use it. You also require permission to communicate with any other prisoners in the Gordon Unit. You have supervised in-person contact with your children once per month and, usually, Zoom contact with them on Tuesdays and Saturdays but not if you have had, or are having, in-person contact with them within a couple of days.
Erin still has contact with her children, I wonder if that is still the case?
From Footnote 64
64 -There were some traffic matters prior to your marriage but, as mentioned, they are not relevant.
Footnote 31
31 - The jury found that you deliberately served poisoned Beef Wellingtons to your lunch guests. Consistent with that finding, I reject your claim that you served the children the Beef Wellington leftovers on the Sunday night. You would not have taken the risk that your children might also be poisoned. The story about feeding the children the leftovers was a ruse to make others think you were ignorant of the presence of the death cap mushrooms in the fatal meals.
Footnote 40
40 - There were 29 victim impact statements in all, including Ian Wilkinson’s. Some victims did not wish to have their statements referenced in these sentencing reasons
Footnote 45
45 - Your counsel claimed that you have Asperger’s Syndrome. That was based on your self-report to various people. There was no expert evidence to back up that claim. Given your ‘credibility problem’ (on your own admission, you have told numerous lies), I am not willing to accept your claim that you have Asperger’s in the absence of corroborating expert evidence. In other words, I am not persuaded on the balance of probabilities that you have Asperger’s Syndrome.
Good try Erin
Footnote 91 & 92
91 - For the avoidance of doubt,these are not the only provisions of the
Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) to which I have had regard. I also note that a sentencer is obliged to have regard to current sentencing practices by
s 5(2)(b) of the
Sentencing Act 1991(Vic)
. But where a sentencer is dealing with a standard sentence offence – relevantly, murder committed on or after 20 March 2017 -the sentencer must not have regard to current sentencing practices for sentences previously imposed where the standard sentencing provisions did not apply:
s5B(2)(b) of the
Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic). I accept the prosecution’s written submission that
‘[a]pplying that criterion,there are no post-standard sentence cases that are comparable to the present case. In any event,given the highly unusual circumstances and extreme seriousness of the offending in this case, it is submitted that current sentencing practices would not provide much if any meaningful guidance for the sentence task.’
92- See, for example,
Yat v The King [2024] VSCA 93 and
The Queen v Males [2007] VSCA 302. In
Yat, the Court of Appeal held that it was a significant mitigating consideration that a young offender had been held in a management unit for over three years during which he was confined alone to his cell for 22–23 hours every day. His time out of his cell‘ involved a period for exercise in as mall caged area around 12 square metres in size.’ I note that Yat’s small caged exercise area was approximately three times the size of your exercise yard.
Footnote 100
100 - I note too that parole is not automatic.