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

[303gmf]

Just thought of another good example: Kouri Richens- murdered her husband, then wrote a children's book on grief!

A case to definitely watch!!

 

[Lucy.D]

Patterson, who turns 51 this month, will spend the best part of her life living off prison slop after blowing her fortune on her cruel and prolonged defence.

Once the appeal situation has been decided, I think I'll frame that quote and put it on the wall in front of me.

You can also quote me saying that it is a disgusting waste of money and any money spent unsuccessfully trying to get an appeal would be like throwing good money after bad.

I don't care if the judge had taken two weeks to instruct the jury or if the jury took a month to decide her fate, she was always going to prison for an extremely long time because she murdered three people and probably hoped to kill at least 2 more.

And all being very close family members. What sort of vile person would do all that murdering and spend millions and a few fake tears in trying to pretend she didn't do it.

Justice Beale could have given her life without parole and an appeal still would not be successful imo because that sentence is still not manifestly unjust for what she did and how she did it.

I wouldn't even be surprised if Mandy asks for extension of time to appeal so he can grasp more money from this evil woman.

 

[JBowie]

I wouldn't even be surprised if Mandy asks for extension of time to appeal so he can grasp more money from this evil woman.

Frankly, I would be surprised if Mandy agrees to represent her any further. He may do, but if he doesn't it won't surprise me. My guess is that he's had enough of her and the case and would be happy to hand over any appeal to another barrister.

As for payment, now that the Supreme Court of Victoria has placed a sale prohibition on the house, he will likely have to line up with everyone else who may stake a claim on her for compensatory damages.

 

[Lucy.D]

Frankly, I would be surprised if Mandy agrees to represent her any further. He may do, but if he doesn't it won't surprise me. My guess is that he's had enough of her and the case and would be happy to hand over any appeal to another barrister.

As for payment, now that the Supreme Court of Victoria has placed a sale prohibition on the house, he will likely have to line up with everyone else who may stake a claim on her for compensatory damages.

We'll find out in a couple of weeks, but I doubt very much if Mandy will be handing over to anyone else.

 

[RiSpy]

I realize all that. My point is, 'life' isn't life.

If Patterson was 18 and received the sentence she did, there's a possibility she'd be walking the streets again at 51. Yes, she'd have to apply and be approved. But I don't like that possibility and neither should society.

Call something 'life', it really should be life. Yes, I know it's a historic term etc. but if it really isn't LIFE, give it a softer name because the reality is, it is a softer sentence.

Agree, classic example is Paul Denyer (age 24) dubbed the Frankston serial killer, was handed three life sentences in 1993 when he was 24. He became eligible to apply for parole in 2022 which was denied. Consequently, the Corrections Amendment (Parole Reform) Bill 2023 was introduced which prevents Denyer from being released on parole unless he is in imminent danger of death or seriously incapacitated and as a result has a reduced capacity to harm anyone.

Corrections Amendment (Parole Reform) Act 2023

www.legislation.vic.gov.au

Parole board knocks back sadistic Frankston serial killer Paul Denyer's bid for freedom

Paul Denyer, who murdered Melbourne women Natalie Russell, Elizabeth Stevens and Debbie Fream in the early 1990s, has been denied parole.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Scuffy35]

Let’s see…

Parental alienation.
Hiding mushrooms in their food for dry runs on how to kill their beautiful grandparents.
Killing their only grandparents .
Squandering their future financial stability and prospects by defending herself against something she knew she was guilty of.
Causing untold endless trauma and damage on her children in possibly the worst possible way a mother can.
Making her children the target of bullying and social scorn.
Trying to kill their loving father.
Using the children as pawns to manipulate Simon.

Among other things.

If that’s not a horrendous mother, I don’t know what is.

It has been proven that Erin is a compulsive liar as a result of the court case. As she was the primary caregiver to her kids, how much of this behavior, and maybe other narcistic behaviors, would be instilled on them as normal and natural? I think this would also be major characteristics of a bad mother to instill this into her children.

If the children continue to visit her in jail at their vulnerable ages, I can only see that she would continue to manipulate them, reinforce her lies, further try to alienate them towards their father and further instill her evilness into them.

For these supervised visits to the jail, who is going to supervise it? I can't imagine anyone from Simon's side of the family would not want to set foot anywhere near the place, not withstanding a long drive to get there. Neither would they want to hand them over to an Erin supporter or advocate to transport and supervise them. Would the government provide the service for free, otherwise who would pay for an independent supervisor?

 

[Megnut]

IMO she's left them with the unsettling brainwashed of rethinking every meal, every illness, wondering now what was real and what wasn't. A mother who undermines her children's very foundation and unsteadies their perspective is not a good mother.

She murdered the children's grandparents, for her own perceived slights. And what if, as teenagers, the children wanted to live with dad? Or if he remarried, wanted a box relationship with the new stepmom? Or went off go college and didn't invite her to something?

How do you perfectly people-please someone who is as inherently fragile, flawed and controlling as EP?

You can't.

JMO

 

[LinasK]

Frankly, I would be surprised if Mandy agrees to represent her any further. He may do, but if he doesn't it won't surprise me. My guess is that he's had enough of her and the case and would be happy to hand over any appeal to another barrister.

As for payment, now that the Supreme Court of Victoria has placed a sale prohibition on the house, he will likely have to line up with everyone else who may stake a claim on her for compensatory damages.

So this means that the victims get compensated first, even though she handed over the deed/title to her lawyers?

 

[SouthAussie]

So this means that the victims get compensated first, even though she handed over the deed/title to her lawyers?

I think that the court will decide, and that is why this matter is scheduled to start with a directions hearing in the Supreme Court in November.

The court can likely decide whether to confirm, vary, or revoke the police restraining order.

imo

 

[JBowie]

I think that the court will decide, and that is why this matter is scheduled to start with a directions hearing in the Supreme Court in November.

The court can likely decide whether to confirm, vary, or revoke the police restraining order.

imo

Yes, it may be handled akin to an insolvency, where 'secured' creditors get first bite at the funds available. I guess we'll see.

 

[RiSpy]

Sly of the Underworld has weighed in on the news that the Office of Public Prosecutions is now considering an appeal over the 33 year minimum sentence for mushroom killer Erin Patterson.

The Herald Sun has reported that the prosecutors were “underwhelmed” with the severity of the jail term, with Sly stating Patterson was given a “discount” by the judge due to her being in solitary confinement.

“If you get that as a discount, you’ve got the bizarre situation that the worse the crime, the bigger the discount,” Sly told Ross and Russ.

'Bizarre situation': Sly weighs in on the latest news surrounding Erin Patterson

Sly of the Underworld has weighed in on the news that the Office of Public Prosecutions is now considering an appeal over the 33 year minimum sentence for mushroom killer Erin Patterson. The Herald Sun has reported that the prosecutors were “underwhelmed” with the severity of the jail term, with...

www.3aw.com.au

 

[JBowie]

An Office of Public Prosecutions spokeswoman told NewsWire that all sentences in DPP cases are routinely reviewed, and while the law allows the DPP to appeal a sentence if it is considered “manifestly inadequate,” such appeals are difficult and only succeed if the court finds the original sentence was clearly unreasonable.

“A decision has not yet been made as to whether the sentence imposed upon Erin Patterson should be appealed,” the spokeswoman said.

After the date of sentencing, both the DPP and Patterson have 28 days to appeal.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/prosecutors-consider-appeal-against-mushroom-murderer-erin-pattersons-sentence/news-story/b39e0328c5ce1be5f47fe80263d6c1fa

 

[JBowie]

Both the DPP and Patterson have 28 days to appeal.

Victoria's Crown prosecutors are said to be underwhelmed by Patterson's sentence.

“All sentences imposed in cases prosecuted by the Director of Public Prosecutions are reviewed as a matter of course,' a spokeswoman told the Herald Sun.

'No decision has been made in Patterson yet.'

A leading barrister told the publication that he thought the non-parole period would be higher but believes the Court of Appeal would unlikely increase the sentence by a few years.

'There's no difference really between 33 and 35 years for the Appeal Court. The prosecution was aiming higher, namely a non-parole period,' he said.

Another huge blow for mushroom cook Erin Patterson

Convicted triple killer Erin Patterson faces the prospect of spending more time behind bars.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Twick]

See, that's what I've never understood either in the US or Australia. A life sentence should mean LIFE- no parole. Otherwise, why not just sentence her to 33 years if she could get out then??? It makes zero sense to me.

Some of the arguments for life not being “life”:

1. LWOP gives prisoners no incentive to observe the rules, if there’s nothing to lose by violence or other acting out.
2. We believe that incarceration should at least attempt rehabilitation. Someone sentenced at 20 *may* be very different at 50, particularly if they were lucky enough to get decent treatment and therapy.

Of course neither of these are likely to apply to Patterson, who is old enough to have a fixed personality/moral code, and is unlikely to be shanking other inmates.

 

[Lucy.D]

The DPP could ask for a review to say the sentence was too lenient and the defence could appeal on the grounds it was too harsh.
I wonder if both matters would be heard at the same time. What a ridiculous situation.

I don't know if anyone else feels the same way but to throw away your entire inheritance on some flimsy defence of murdering three people seems extraordinarily unkind to Erin's children. That's certainly how I feel about this case as she could have simply stuck her hand up and said guilty, give her reasons, do a pschyc test and be out in 25 years and in the meantime hand her kids $1 million each.
She might then have a chance of seeing her kids for a visit at her jail.
Maybe MOO

 

[Megnut]

The DPP could ask for a review to say the sentence was too lenient and the defence could appeal on the grounds it was too harsh.
I wonder if both matters would be heard at the same time. What a ridiculous situation.

I don't know if anyone else feels the same way but to throw away your entire inheritance on some flimsy defence of murdering three people seems extraordinarily unkind to Erin's children. That's certainly how I feel about this case as she could have simply stuck her hand up and said guilty, give her reasons, do a pschyc test and be out in 25 years and in the meantime hand her kids $1 million each.
She might then have a chance of seeing her kids for a visit at her jail.
Maybe MOO

That would require putting two people first. She's not capable.

JMO

 

[iamshadow21]

That would require putting two people first. She's not capable.

JMO

Adding on to this, I think people focus too much on the ballet and flying lessons and not enough on the fact that she was essentially using her children to do dry runs of her murders for months, and bragging about it online.

This is not a woman who cares about her children.

MOO

 

[Kemug]

IMO she's left them with the unsettling brainwashed of rethinking every meal, every illness, wondering now what was real and what wasn't. A mother who undermines her children's very foundation and unsteadies their perspective is not a good mother.

She murdered the children's grandparents, for her own perceived slights. And what if, as teenagers, the children wanted to live with dad? Or if he remarried, wanted a box relationship with the new stepmom? Or went off go college and didn't invite her to something?

RSBM
I doubt that Simon would have remotely considered remarrying while Erin was free, he knew her only too well. And it would have been a very brave woman to agree! But now, I hope that in time he will. He is a nice man, and deserves to know what a happy marriage is. Even though they would never be safe until Erin was the late unlamented.

 

[Penny68]

For the majority of murderers they actually 'see' their victims dead, they did it, they see the end result as it were, what they caused to happen to those innocent people.

Then they walk away from the death scene carrying that picture in their minds. End of story so to speak. Be it by a knife, a gun, strangulation, even killed by their car.

But with Erin she will never carry in her the picture of their deaths. She never saw them at their homes starting to be violently ill, the fear they felt, the eventual being rushed to hospital in a dreadful and painful state.

Her part of course was to feed them the poisoned mushrooms, job done.

I reckon she has never, and will never carry even a trace of guilt of the evil she caused as she never actually saw it all from the start to the finish of their eventual horrible and painful demise.

With that in mind she will never admit her guilt, she will always be a danger in society and she will never carry any remorse. I hope she will never ever walk this land again.

 

[sunspun]

For the majority of murderers they actually 'see' their victims dead, they did it, they see the end result as it were, what they caused to happen to those innocent people.

Then they walk away from the death scene carrying that picture in their minds. End of story so to speak. Be it by a knife, a gun, strangulation, even killed by their car.

But with Erin she will never carry in her the picture of their deaths. She never saw them at their homes starting to be violently ill, the fear they felt, the eventual being rushed to hospital in a dreadful and painful state.

Her part of course was to feed them the poisoned mushrooms, job done.

I reckon she has never, and will never carry even a trace of guilt of the evil she caused as she never actually saw it all from the start to the finish of their eventual horrible and painful demise.

With that in mind she will never admit her guilt, she will always be a danger in society and she will never carry any remorse. I hope she will never ever walk this land again.

That had never crossed my mind, until you posted this, that this particular murder was different in that way. Interesting perspective, ty.