GUILTY Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 *Arrest* #20

[Woolly]

Maybe I am naively optimistic, but being eligible for parole after 30 (or however many) years isn’t the same as being granted parole. Given what we have seen of Erin’s personality and behaviour, I’m not sure she would be granted parole at all, even if it ends up being an option.

 

[Ellery84]

Maybe I am naively optimistic, but being eligible for parole after 30 (or however many) years isn’t the same as being granted parole. Given what we have seen of Erin’s personality and behaviour, I’m not sure she would be granted parole at all, even if it ends up being an option.

I agree. Let’s say she becomes eligible for parole after a 30 year sentence: It might depend on if she can grow as a person, accept what she has done, show remorse and work towards paying her debt to society.

IMO

She’s also served 2 years right? So she may get 28 years before being eligible for parole?

 

[JBowie]

In sentencing Ristevski in April, Justice Christopher Beale said he did not have enough information to determine the severity of the killing.

Well, he cannot claim that he lacks information in this case. He sat through days of detailed evidence and he's heard or read 28 victim impact statements which he described as a tsunami of grief.

Apart from that he's seen what happens if he imposes a manifestly inadequate sentence for murder.

 

[SouthAussie]

Well, he cannot claim that he lacks information in this case. He sat through days of detailed evidence and he's heard or read 28 victim impact statements which he described as a tsunami of grief.

Apart from that he's seen what happens if he imposes a manifestly inadequate sentence for murder.

And the prosecution didn't hesitate to appeal a pre-trial decision (even though they didn't succeed in the appeal).


But Beale ruled on 14 March 2025 that the two sets of charges, referred to as the “Simon charges” and the “lunch charges”, would have to be heard separately. The DPP unsuccessfully appealed to the court of appeal, and then decided to drop the attempted murder charges relating to Simon.

What the jury wasn't allowed to hear in the Erin Patterson trial: suspicions and mystery illnesses

Material and claims the jury in Australia’s mushroom lunch murder trial wasn’t allowed to hear can be reported after a suppression order was lifted

www.theguardian.com

 

[JBowie]

And the prosecution didn't hesitate to appeal a pre-trial decision (even though they didn't succeed in the appeal).


But Beale ruled on 14 March 2025 that the two sets of charges, referred to as the “Simon charges” and the “lunch charges”, would have to be heard separately. The DPP unsuccessfully appealed to the court of appeal, and then decided to drop the attempted murder charges relating to Simon.

What the jury wasn't allowed to hear in the Erin Patterson trial: suspicions and mystery illnesses

Material and claims the jury in Australia’s mushroom lunch murder trial wasn’t allowed to hear can be reported after a suppression order was lifted

www.theguardian.com

I side with Beale's decision there.

As I've opined here before, combing SP's attempted murder charges with the death cap murders would, in my non-lawyer opinion, have created a very confusing situation for the jury as the technical experts were examined and cross-examined, and may well have resulted in a not guilty by the measure of beyond reasonable doubt.

I believe that by focusing on the death caps lunch, the jury was clearly able to see all of the damning evidence time-lined out and her litany of lies.

Further, my reading between the lines of some of the comments Beale made during the plea hearing, makes me think that she's well and truly gone.

 

[SouthAussie]

I side with Beale's decision there.

As I've opined here before, combing SP's attempted murder charges with the death cap murders would, in my non-lawyer opinion, have created a very confusing situation for the jury as the technical experts were examined and cross-examined, and may well have resulted in a not guilty by the measure of beyond reasonable doubt.

I believe that by focusing on the death caps lunch, the jury was clearly able to see all of the damning evidence time-lined out and her litany of lies.

Yes, but the point I was making is that the prosecution has already indicated it is okay with appealing decisions - in this instance, any seemingly inadequate sentence. (if that should happen)

 

[JBowie]

Yes, but the point I was making is that the prosecution has already indicated it is okay with appealing decisions - in this instance, any seemingly inadequate sentence. (if that should happen)

I now see your point and I agree.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE

As stated in The Rule, death penalty discussion is not allowed at Websleuths unless it is germane to the case under discussion.

As Australia does not have the DP, it is off limits in this case.

 

[Scuffy35]

RSBM

But Beale ruled on 14 March 2025 that the two sets of charges, referred to as the “Simon charges” and the “lunch charges”, would have to be heard separately. The DPP unsuccessfully appealed to the court of appeal, and then decided to drop the attempted murder charges relating to Simon.

What the jury wasn't allowed to hear in the Erin Patterson trial: suspicions and mystery illnesses

Material and claims the jury in Australia’s mushroom lunch murder trial wasn’t allowed to hear can be reported after a suppression order was lifted

www.theguardian.com

I don't know how Beale would think there was a realistic way to try these seperately. Even if the prosecution wanted to go after her for the "Simon charges", the expense in doing so would probably not be worth it as may not add much to her sentence, and may even rrsult in a "served concurrently" rubbish.

Also would the prosecution need to wait for her avenues of appeals to be exausted first, otherwise there might be a possibility of a retrial the the "lunch charges" after a tral for the "Simon charges"?

 

[Megnut]

I don't know how Beale would think there was a realistic way to try these seperately. Even if the prosecution wanted to go after her for the "Simon charges", the expense in doing so would probably not be worth it as may not add much to her sentence, and may even rrsult in a "served concurrently" rubbish.

Also would the prosecution need to wait for her avenues of appeals to be exausted first, otherwise there might be a possibility of a retrial the the "lunch charges" after a tral for the "Simon charges"?

Seems like the judge thought it was overly prejudicial. A history of unproven poisoning would lead to a certain conviction, ripe then to be appealed and overturned.

As it was, EP was found guilty on the merits of her actions specific to the four victims of her lunch.

What is most compelling IMO, short of proving BARD for poisoning SP over time, is the chronology of her searches, which IMO document a trend toward increasingly more fatal poisons.

So again, I don't love that her previous actions were barred from trial, it's a relief to know she can't appeal on those grounds. Judge ran a tidy trial.

I got briefly waylaid by the endless summary of the Defense's position. Remember, CM put on no defense. No experts. No one to refute the State's closings. They put EP on the stand. She was the only way to introduce her version of the facts, which only grew more ludicrous the longer she talked. Still, the State couldn't vet, rebut. All the judge did, is lay out EP's testimony and do so without affect or judgment. It was up to the jury to weigh it.
V
The judge was right too to instruct the jury that, if they found EP to be not credible, they couldn't find her guilty on that count. They could however disregard her "evidence", line by line, then return to the State's evidence to see if they've established her guilt BARD.

I see now how even, unbiased, methodical and thorough the judge was. IMO there is no air getting through the appeal door.

Choosing to take the stand was a bad decision. But (poor) strategy is not (legitimate) grounds for appeal. I'm certain the judge properly polled EP to make sure she was freely taking the stand, that it had been properly discussed with counsel, and that she was satisfied with the counsel she had. Locked it up tight.

EP proved herself to be wildly untruthful. What of her story was corroborated by anyone? And once you remove it, the case is straightforward. Awful but straightforward.

She was the source of the DCs, she had a dehydrator which she disposed, toxins were found in her prepared BW, although notably not visible, suggesting one further step, turned the dried DCs to powder. Who does that? Why? What need or value could powdered mushrooms OF ANY KIND add to a recipe? Someone who REALLY doesn't want abhor to know there are mushrooms in the meal...

Had EP offered credible remorse, whether true or faked, or even if she'd said nothing at all, one juror might have ascribed way too much humanity to EP and felt she'd made a terrible mistake.

But IMO EP cleared that up herself. Did nothing to assist the medical team treating the victims. Nothing about how she could have accidentally picked dangerous mushrooms, how awful she felt about her food causing agony and death, horror that she could have put her children at risk, you know with deadly mushrooms in the house and didn't even know it.

I hope the judge gives her consecutive sentences, if that possible, whatever it takes to be a real whioe life sentence.

Age is a biohazard and needs to remain behind bars, and even there, no one should grow lax. If she can poison the food supply, she will.

JMO

 

[Charlot123]

I don't think so, because;

1. They took their own plates - no way to 'dose' them.
2. Women metabolise poisons quicker and die quicker due to lower muscle concentration and smaller organs (like the liver).
3. You can't just "kill them a little bit" with deathcaps. Once a certain threshold is crossed with the dose, they are nearly certainly going to die.

IMO

Thank you!

 

[Charlot123]

If you go private you can get it done within a few weeks. I just did that.

The tests are well-normed worldwide and no one is going to use experimental ones in court cases where solid and proven data is vital. So it is a certain routine to follow. From experience of acquaintances who did the tests and evaluations, one can get them done in one day, with a Ph.D. level psychologists if people are willing to spend 4 x the usual cost. Psychiatrists may be more complex as not everyone is interested in dealing with the court system, but in itself, it is not that costly.

These costs are likely still low if compared to her legal fees. JMO. The biggest chunk of time would probably be the write-up, not the evaluation itself.

(In psychiatry, the diagnosis itself means less than the level of functioning.)

 

[Charlot123]

Seems like the judge thought it was overly prejudicial. A history of unproven poisoning would lead to a certain conviction, ripe then to be appealed and overturned.

As it was, EP was found guilty on the merits of her actions specific to the four victims of her lunch.

What is most compelling IMO, short of proving BARD for poisoning SP over time, is the chronology of her searches, which IMO document a trend toward increasingly more fatal poisons.

So again, I don't love that her previous actions were barred from trial, it's a relief to know she can't appeal on those grounds. Judge ran a tidy trial.

I got briefly waylaid by the endless summary of the Defense's position. Remember, CM put on no defense. No experts. No one to refute the State's closings. They put EP on the stand. She was the only way to introduce her version of the facts, which only grew more ludicrous the longer she talked. Still, the State couldn't vet, rebut. All the judge did, is lay out EP's testimony and do so without affect or judgment. It was up to the jury to weigh it.
V
The judge was right too to instruct the jury that, if they found EP to be not credible, they couldn't find her guilty on that count. They could however disregard her "evidence", line by line, then return to the State's evidence to see if they've established her guilt BARD.

I see now how even, unbiased, methodical and thorough the judge was. IMO there is no air getting through the appeal door.

Choosing to take the stand was a bad decision. But (poor) strategy is not (legitimate) grounds for appeal. I'm certain the judge properly polled EP to make sure she was freely taking the stand, that it had been properly discussed with counsel, and that she was satisfied with the counsel she had. Locked it up tight.

EP proved herself to be wildly untruthful. What of her story was corroborated by anyone? And once you remove it, the case is straightforward. Awful but straightforward.

She was the source of the DCs, she had a dehydrator which she disposed, toxins were found in her prepared BW, although notably not visible, suggesting one further step, turned the dried DCs to powder. Who does that? Why? What need or value could powdered mushrooms OF ANY KIND add to a recipe? Someone who REALLY doesn't want abhor to know there are mushrooms in the meal...

Had EP offered credible remorse, whether true or faked, or even if she'd said nothing at all, one juror might have ascribed way too much humanity to EP and felt she'd made a terrible mistake.

But IMO EP cleared that up herself. Did nothing to assist the medical team treating the victims. Nothing about how she could have accidentally picked dangerous mushrooms, how awful she felt about her food causing agony and death, horror that she could have put her children at risk, you know with deadly mushrooms in the house and didn't even know it.

I hope the judge gives her consecutive sentences, if that possible, whatever it takes to be a real whioe life sentence.

Age is a biohazard and needs to remain behind bars, and even there, no one should grow lax. If she can poison the food supply, she will.

JMO

In fact, this is a very straightforward situation. When you invite in four relatives for a meal and they end up deadly poisoned immediately afterwards, it is sort of an Occam’s razor.

But I did not see any jokes, memes or accusations in the press. No nastiness. The press is definitely not as aggressive as in other cases. The case was findable in literature under geographical place, not her name (rightfully so, as she has kids). I think that in this case, the MSM was substance-, not emotional-based. And the only response it elicits is “what the heck?” more than anything else. In fact, even old memories of coworkers emphasized her smarts, her attractiveness, her being a good worker and a lot of potential. The press portrayed her as a good mother. The trend was to post her younger photos where she appeared an attractive mom with a young child.

If anything, this case leaves us with sadness, one has so many talents and potential, and see how it all ended.

Mainly, EP was never crucified in the press. For once, the press did a good job. JMO, there is no prejudice. The history will keep the case as a learning one, not an “evil one”, and rightfully so, because of the kids. Just my prediction.

 

[LadyL]

NGL, as a nerdy introvert myself, her prison conditions sound kind of ideal. Meals provided, private exercise yard, library, computer, hobbies (like crochet), kitchenette, TV, social isolation, books, free university courses, access to dental, medical, programmes, etc etc... does it get better for an introvert?

I am hardly pitiful of her prison conditions. She's not stuck in a Shangai prison begging for food and bandaids and bleach for her filthy toilet.

I hope she gets LWOP and spends the rest of her life in this oasis for introverts (although, I wish it was more punishing). May she rot in hell! IMO

I was thinking the same.

 

[Tweet57]

I was thinking the same.

Yes! After being found guilty of the murder of 3, and attempted murder of 1, how dare she complain in an attempt to reduce her sentence? She is so entitled and has no sense of reality.
I’m sure the Government has better projects to spend money on than improve prisons to 5 star resorts for murderers.
One of EP’s biggest problems is she has never been grateful and seemed to complain about a lot of things in her life.
No sympathy for EP at all - only her victims, their families and loved ones

 

[Susjay]

„The defence has drawn attention to the harmful conditions of prison isolation, which Patterson has endured for approximately 400 days.

Supreme Court Judge Beale has said he would give “weighty consideration” to her prison conditions in determining the sentence, noting Patterson’s prison conditions do not “sound very humane”.“

I agree that EP should get LWOP for her crime and I agree that she forfeited any right to special or better care than what is considered humane conditions . I wish they would would have fixed conditions in Dame Frost much sooner, so her prolonged solitary confinement couldn’t be used as an argument for leniency, but I fear it’s too late and she’ll get discounts on her sentence due to it. Judge Beale won’t discard the fact that the conditions she’s held under aren’t lawful and that he didn’t get a guarantee that they will get better in the near future. Mandy did a good job pointing things out, once again.

Erin Patterson is a triple murderer. That’s no excuse for inhumane prison conditions

Prison conditions should comply with human rights obligations and avoid cruel, inhumane, degrading treatment of prisoners.

theconversation.com

She should be kept away from others. She’s at risk from harm from others, but she is as toxic as they come.

 

[Susjay]

Don was reportedly fit and in good health but didn't survive even after having a liver transplant.

Ian somehow survived though, without even having a liver transplant, or at least there have been no reports that I am aware of that he had one.

[EDIT - As I remember it now, Don also ate some of Gails portion, so that might explain why he faired worse than Ian]

Yes, he ingested more poison. Vale Don.

 

[Ellery84]

I’m sure the Government has better projects to spend money on than improve prisons to 5 star resorts for murderers.

I should hope so.

Is there only one prison in Australia?

No, of course not.

 

[SilentHill]

View attachment 610987
Patterson (pictured leaving court on August 25)

Grim details emerge about Erin Patterson's isolated prison life

Patterson, 50, was found guilty of poisoning three of her in-laws - and attempting to kill another - with a lunch laced with death cap mushrooms in July 2023.

www.dailymail.co.uk

She looks fed, watered and her hair is lovely and straight. What's this nonsense about her living conditions

 

[SilentHill]

DBM - duplicate