Huge question in mushroom trial
Is Erin Patterson a cold and calculated killer, or an accidental poisoner who panicked fearing she would be blamed?
That is the question jurors in Victorian mother's triple-murder trial will be tasked with answering.
After seven weeks of evidence and four days of closing arguments from both sides of the bar table, the jury was sent home earlier on Thursday afternoon with a final message from Justice Christopher Beale.
'It is more important than ever that you have a good weekend,' the trial judge said.
'I really want you to come back refreshed on Tuesday.'
Ms Patterson, 50, is facing trial after pleading not guilty to the murders of Don Patterson, Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson, and the attempted murder of Ian Wilkinson.
Prosecutors allege she deliberately poisoned a beef wellington lunch for the two couples with death cap mushrooms, while her defence say it was a tragic accident. Erin Patterson denied she wanted to harm her in-laws. Brooke Grebert-Craig. Credit: Supplied
The trial, now in its final stages, will hear from Justice Beale on Tuesday as he sums up the relevant law, evidence and arguments, and identifies the key issues jurors will need to determine.
This week, Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC and defence barrister Colin Mandy SC had their final opportunity to address the jury.
What the prosecution alleges
Over two days, Dr Rogers took the jury through the evidence that showed, in her submission, why the jury should have no difficulty finding Ms Patterson intentionally sourced and included death caps in the lunch, intending to kill her guests.
Dr Rogers said it was the Crown's case the accused woman saw and acted upon two posts to iNaturalist on April 28 and May 22, 2023, of death cap mushrooms in the Gippsland region.
It's alleged she visited Loch 10 days after Christine McKenzie shared the sighting online, two hours before purchasing a Sunbeam Food Lab dehydrator.
An image, located in the cache data of Google Photos on a tablet found at her home, depicted what mycologist Dr Tom May said was 'highly consistent' with death caps sitting on a dehydrator tray in her kitchen, the prosecutor said. Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC is leading the prosecution of Ms Patterson. NewsWire/ David Crosling Credit: News Corp Australia
These had a last modified date on May 4, the jury was told.
'It is open for you to infer that having dehydrated death cap mushrooms, at some stage she blitzed them into a powder, as she admitted doing for other mushrooms, and, in that form, hid them in the lunch guests' beef wellington,' Dr Rogers submitted.
Dr Rogers told the jury Ms Patterson's phone records captured a possible second visit to Loch on May 22 and Outtrim the same day, where Dr May posted a death cap sighting on May 21.
The prosecutor alleged Ms Patterson invited her husband Simon Patterson and his four relatives to her home two weeks before the lunch under the pretence of wanting to discuss medical issues.
Simon pulled out the evening before, while the four lunch guests arrived about 12.30pm at Ms Patterson's Leongatha home. Simon Patterson remains married to Erin Patterson. Picture. NewsWire/Nadir Kinani Credit: News Corp Australia
After the lunch, it's alleged Ms Patterson raised a fabricated cancer diagnosis to explain away the 'otherwise unusual lunch invitation'.
'You might be wondering why on earth would she tell such a lie?' Dr Rogers asked.
' Well, the prosecution says that the accused never thought she would have to account for this lie … her lie would die with them.'
Dr Rogers told the jury it was the Crown's case Ms Patterson prepared six individually portioned beef wellingtons – five containing death cap mushrooms – with the sixth 'clearly intended' for her husband should he have changed his mind.
She pointed to evidence from Ian Wilkinson that the four guests ate off large grey dishes while Ms Patterson had a smaller 'orangey-tan' plate, and Simon's evidence that Heather told him she noticed the accused woman had a coloured plate that was 'different to the rest'.
'The only reason she would do that is because she knew that there were poisonous mushrooms in the other meals because she'd put them there, and to ensure that she could identify the sole non-poisonous meal,' Dr Rogers alleged.
Each of the lunch guests began experiencing symptoms of nausea and vomiting later the same night and made their way to hospital the following morning. Pastor Ian Wilkinson recovered after about a month and a half in hospital. NewsWire/ David Crosling Credit: News Corp Australia
By Tuesday, August 1, each was critically ill and in an induced coma at the Austin Hospital in Melbourne.
Dr Rogers took the jury to Ms Patterson's first hospital attendance at 8.05am on July 31 – two days after the lunch.
She told the court this was the first time Ms Patterson learned doctors suspected death cap mushroom poisoning.
'This is the moment, we suggest to you, that she realised that what she had done had not gone undetected. Her reaction: she wanted to leave,' Dr Rogers said.
The jury was told Ms Patterson checked herself out of hospital against medical advice and returned 98 minutes later.
Prosecutors say it is unclear what she did during this time, but argued her behaviour was not consistent with someone being told they'd potentially consumed a deadly toxin and their life was in danger.
Dr Rogers said the Crown alleged the only 'logical explanation' was Ms Patterson knew very well she had not eaten death caps and had fled home to work out how to manage the situation.
She returned to hospital at 9.48am, allegedly feigning being sick, and was transferred to the Monash Medical Centre in Melbourne. Ms Patterson has pleaded not guilty. NewsWire / Paul Tyquin Credit: News Corp Australia
Dr Rogers told the jury Ms Patterson was discharged 24 hours after returning to hospital, with medical results showing no evidence of mushroom poisoning.
The prosecutor alleged the accused woman's actions after returning home amounted to a 'cover up'.
These included allegedly lying about feeding the leftovers, without the mushrooms and pastry, to her kids, dumping the food dehydrator used to dry death caps and handing a 'dummy phone' to police.
'Phone B, we say, is a dummy phone set up deliberately by the accused to trick the police and to conceal the existence and, most importantly, the contents of her usual mobile phone,' Dr Rogers said.
As part of her closing address, Dr Rogers pointed to what the Crown allege are five 'calculated deceptions' they say lie at the heart of the case.
These allegedly were; the fabricated cancer claim, the lethal dose of poison 'secreted' in a home cooked meal, Ms Patterson feigning being sick, the cover-up and the untruthful evidence given from the witness box.
She told the jury understanding the deceptions would allow them to 'safely reject any reasonable possibility that this was a terrible accident' and allow them to find she committed each of the alleged crimes.
'We say there is no reasonable alternative explanation for what happened to the lunch guests, other than the accused deliberately sourced death cap mushrooms and deliberately included them in the meal she served them, with an intention to kill them,' Dr Rogers said. Simon's parents, Don and Gail Patterson, died a day apart in early August 2023. Supplied. Credit: Supplied
She asked jurors to consider what they would have done if it was really a horrible accident.
'Would you go into self-preservation mode just worrying about protecting yourself from blame?' the prosecutor asked.
'No. That's not what you'd do. You would do everything you could to help the people you love.'
What the defence say
Colin Mandy SC, Ms Patterson's barrister, began his address by listing out 'two simple issues' he said the jury would have to determine.
These were; is there a reasonable possibility that death cap mushrooms were put into this meal accidentally, and is there a reasonable possibility that his client did not intend to kill her guests.
Mr Mandy argued the prosecution had taken a flawed approach to the case, starting with the theory that Ms Patterson was guilty and working backwards by cherry-picking convenient fragments and discarding inconvenient truths. Colin Mandy SC is spearheading Ms Patterson's defence. NewsWire/Ian Currie Credit: News Corp Australia
The defence lawyer told jurors the prosecution had sought to paint Ms Patterson as a cold and calculated killer who had spent months planning this crime, but he questioned what possible reason she would have to kill.
He said Ms Patterson had no motive to want her husband or in-laws dead, arguing the evidence actually showed she had 18 years' of 'anti-motive' with strong and loving relationships with Simon's parents.
'There's no possible prospect that Erin wanted in those circumstances to destroy her whole world, her whole life. Surely it's more likely that her account is true,' he said.
'Don and Gail had never been anything but kind and understanding to Erin Patterson. There was absolutely no reason at all for her to hurt them in any way at all.'
Mr Mandy argued the prosecution had made much of a short dispute Ms Patterson had with Simon in December 2022 to show there was tension in the family dynamics.
But he said even Simon agreed the spat over their children's schooling and finances had simmered down by the end that month showed it was 'an entirely unremarkable minor blow-up'. The trial has drawn an extensive media presence. NewsWire/ David Crosling Credit: News Corp Australia
Mr Mandy took the jury to a series of disparaging messages Ms Patterson sent about her in-laws to her online friends and to Don and Gail themselves in December, remarking this was her being honest about her feelings and standing up for herself.
'This was an aberration in her dealings with the Pattersons, and there is nothing to say otherwise,' he said.
'It stands out in this case because it's the only one.'
The defence barrister reminded jurors of what Ms Patterson said about the reason for the lunch itself; that she'd been feeling 'isolated' from Don and Gail in recent months and was proactively trying to build bridges.
He again questioned if it was more likely that she wanted to kill everyone or that she wanted to reconnect for the sake of her children.
Moving on to the lunch and Ian Wilkinson's evidence that Ms Patterson ate from an orangey-tan dish while the other guests ate from large grey plates, Mr Mandy said Ian must have been mistaken.
He pointed to footage taken by police at her home on August 5 which showed a small collection of plates – none of them grey or orangey-tan – and Simon's evidence that Ms Patterson did not have sets of matching plates.
This, Mr Mandy said, was backed up by the evidence of Ms Patterson and the two children.
'The prosecution says, 'No, no, no, Ian's right and they're all wrong',' he said.
'Or, in Erin's case, not wrong or honestly mistaken. In Erin's case she's lying.' Erin Patterson has maintained she did not want to harm anyone. Supplied. Credit: Supplied
Mr Mandy suggested that it wouldn't make sense to use a different coloured plate to identify the unpoisoned meal, when it would be far simpler to mark the pastry.
Turning to Ms Patterson's illness and actions after the lunch, Mr Mandy said she had told jurors she binge ate an orange cake Gail brought and made herself sick.
He suggested that because she had not claimed she vomited immediately after the lunch, or that she saw the meal in her vomit it was more likely to be the truth.
The defence barrister pointed to Ms Patterson's account of adding dried mushrooms to the duxelles when preparing the dish, thinking it tasted bland.
He suggested jurors might think she continued to taste the dish, after accidentally adding death caps, and this would be a 'sensible reason why Erin became unwell earlier' than the others.
Mr Mandy told the jury the evidence was Ms Patterson was sick, just not as sick as Don, Gail, Heather and Ian.
He said the expert evidence was people could experience a range of illness severity even after eating the same meal.
On Ms Patterson's account of feeding the leftovers of the lunch to her children for dinner a day later, Mr Mandy said there was no expert evidence to back up the Crown's claim this cannot be true because they did not get sick.
'We submit to you that's another invitation to speculation; to make an assumption rather than acting on the evidence,' he said. Heather Wilkinson died, while her husband Ian survived. Supplied Credit: Supplied
Mr Mandy told the jury there had been no evidence in the trial about what level of exposure to death cap toxins was required to affect the body or that vomiting a meal would leave a presence of the toxins.
He pointed to evidence Ms Patterson had elevated haemoglobin and fibrinogen and low potassium; which intensive care professor Andrew Bersten said supported a diarrhoeal illness.
'Medical testing revealed three different factors,' he said.
'Three things that can't be faked.'
Turning to her decision to leave hospital 5 minutes after arriving on July 31, Mr Mandy explained that his client was not prepared for what she walked into.
'In our submission to you when she left the hospital at 8.10am, there is only one reasonable explanation for why that happened, and that is she had arrived thinking she would be admitted to get some fluids for gastro,' he said. Mr Mandy and his junior counsel barrister Sophie Stafford. NewsWire/Ian Currie Credit: News Corp Australia
Instead she was subjected to an 'extremely intense five-minute interaction' and struggled to understand what she was being told.
Mr Mandy told the court his client returned after doing what she said she needed to do to prepare and was admitted.
He said it was on August 1, while in hospital in Melbourne, when Ms Patterson began to panic that she would be blamed for the illnesses.
Mr Mandy told the court his client was not proud of the lies she told and the decisions she made, such as taking the dehydrator to the tip, but Ms Patterson was 'not on trial for being a liar'.
'She starts panicking and she starts lying from that point,' he said.
'All of the things that she did after the lunch fall into that category and none of them … can actually change what her intention was at the time of the lunch. Either she had the intention or she didn't.
'You can't change the past because you behave badly in the future.' Members of the Patterson and Wilkinson families have been present every day for the trial. NewsWire / David Geraghty Credit: News Corp Australia
In the days after the lunch, the jury was told, Ms Patterson told dozens of doctors, public health authorities and police she used button mushrooms from Woolworths and dried mushrooms she had purchased in April that year from an Asian grocer in Melbourne.
On the stand, she maintained this was the case but said she now believed she may have added foraged wild mushrooms to the same Tupperware container.
The barrister said photos of wild mushrooms found on a SD card supported Ms Patterson's account of developing an interest in foraging and eating mushrooms during the early Covid lockdowns in 2020.
Mr Mandy said this interest also explains why computer records show she briefly looked up death cap mushroom sightings on the citizen science website iNaturalist in May 2022.
'It makes perfect sense that in the context of that dawning interest … that she would become aware of death cap mushrooms,' he said.
'And the question occurred to her because she was picking mushrooms in the wild, do they grow in South Gippsland?'
Mr Mandy told the jury his client did not have to take the stand, but chose to place herself under 'such an incredible amount of scrutiny' from an experienced prosecutor.
'She came through that unscathed,' he argued.
'Her account remained coherent and consistent, day after day after day, even when challenged, rapid fire, from multiple angles, repeatedly.'
Finishing his closing address, the barrister argued the prosecution can't get over the high bar of beyond reasonable doubt.
'If you think at the end of your deliberations … is a possibility that this was an accident, a reasonable possibility, you must find her not guilty,' he said.
The trial continues.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7NEWS
2 hours ago
- 7NEWS
Pedestrian hit and killed outside Endeavour Hills shopping centre in Melbourne's southeastt
A pedestrian has died after being hit and killed by a car outside a busy Melbourne shopping centre. Emergency services rushed to the scene after receiving reports a car had hit a pedestrian on Heatherton Rd, near Matthew Flinders Ave, in Endeavour Hills about 7.45pm. The pedestrian, who is yet to be formally identified, sadly died at the scene. The female driver of the vehicle was uninjured in the crash and stopped to help. Police are currently investigating the circumstances surrounding the collision and a report will be prepared for the coroner. The Victorian road toll now provisionally stands at 144 this year, compared to 132 for the same time last year. Anyone who witnessed the incident, with CCTV/dashcam footage or any other information that could assist police is urged to contact them.
7NEWS
5 hours ago
- 7NEWS
Victorian influencer Jordan van den Lamb, known as ‘Purple Pingers' sparks Aussie housing war
When a Victorian woman returned to her investment property in Melbourne's outer suburbs, she didn't expect to find squatters inside — or to learn that her home's address had been shared online by a Federal Senate candidate. The woman, who had been managing her late father's estate, reportedly arrived to find the locks changed, security cameras installed, and new heating fitted to the exterior. Police were called to force entry, where she discovered most of her father's belongings were missing, including sentimental items like antique furniture and family heirlooms. The damage left her about $70,000 out of pocket after her insurance claim was denied. The property had been vacant and was publicly shared by Jordan van den Lamb, known online as 'Purple Pingers', as part of his campaign encouraging people to identify and use unused homes for shelter. Mr van den Lamb has become a lightning rod in the national housing debate. But as his TikTok-fuelled activism escalates, so too do the consequences for homeowners, real estate agents, and authorities caught in the fallout. While some of his followers see occupying vacant properties as a form of protest, the legal reality is more complicated. A squatter is someone who enters and uses an abandoned or unoccupied property, often through unlocked access. While entering through an open door is not technically illegal, remaining after being asked to leave by the rightful owner constitutes trespassing, which is a criminal offence in all Australian states. The influencer rose to prominence online through his viral TikTok account and website Sh.t Rentals, where he publicly exposed unoccupied, poor-quality or overpriced rental properties. But his campaign has since evolved into something more confrontational. Mr van den Lamb said he shared the address of the Victorian property online in a bid to raise awareness and attract more submissions of vacant homes. 'Yes, that was shared by me,' he said. 'That property had been empty, off the top of my head, for like 17 years. We don't know whether the squatters moved in before or after I posted the address.' He said the situation was brought to his attention by a news organisation and confirmed, 'I had no interaction with her (the homeowner).' When asked about the impact on the Victorian woman, Mr van den Lamb told The Nightly he felt 'bad' but claimed there were bigger issues at play. 'I feel bad that her belongings were taken, especially if they had sentimental value,' he said. 'But we hear from people like this every day. We never hear from someone sleeping rough — and frankly, their voices matter more, because they're the ones who are dying.' How it works Mr van den Lamb said he personally ran the operation using a Google Form to collect submissions of empty homes and verify them through online tools. 'I call for submissions... ask people to submit an empty property, the address, how long they think it's been vacant... then I check Google Maps, street view, last sold, last rented, planning applications.' He added: 'Once someone reaches out via email, I might ask if they're alone — I prefer not to send solo people just for safety. I go through the list, send through what I know, and tell them to verify it themselves.' 'I only post very few online — just to get more submissions,' he said. 'Most properties are shared privately via email with those in need.' In one of his TikTok videos, Mr van den Lamb instructs viewers on how to detect long-term vacancies by searching real estate websites and analysing listing duration. But one real estate agent says Mr van den Lamb's actions have changed how some sellers think about signage and advertising. Victorian real estate agent manager Mark Vorstenbosch from BigginScott said, 'There's this idea that putting up a 'for sale' board might alert people that a home is empty, but I think not putting one up puts you in more danger, because you don't know when someone might turn up.' Loading TikTok Post Kelly Ryan, former chief executive officer of the Real Estate Institute of Victoria (REIV), described Mr van den Lamb's tactics as concerning. 'Encouraging people to squat in properties that aren't theirs isn't good social behaviour — it's not a good service to anybody,' she told The Nightly. Ms Ryan warned that the broader risk is a chilling effect on landlords and property providers. 'This kind of behaviour is counterproductive to tackling the housing crisis,' she said. 'If you discourage private property owners from staying in the market, you risk starving supply not just now, but five years down the track.' Ms Ryan also addressed common misconceptions about who owned investment properties. 'There's this idea that all property owners are wealthy. But the second biggest group of landlords in Australia are school teachers, often owning just one investment property. These are the people being affected.' According to Homes Victoria's Rental Report for December 2024, the number of new rental lettings, which is a key indicator of housing availability, declined statewide by 1.8 per cent in the December quarter compared to the same period the year before. Metropolitan Melbourne saw a 1.3 per cent drop, while regional Victoria experienced a sharper 4.1 per cent fall. The total number of active rental bonds held by the Residential Tenancies Bond Authority also declined by 3.6 per cent, a significant shift, given that bond volumes had averaged 1.0 per cent annual growth over the past five years. 'These early indicators suggest a contraction in the overall rental stock,' REIV noted at the time, 'reflecting a waning of investor confidence in the market.' Victoria Police declined to comment on specific incidents related to Mr van den Lamb's activism but said homelessness was 'not an offence'. 'Should an offence be detected, police will deal with that as per normal practice,' the spokesperson said. 'The priority for Victoria Police is to link people who are homeless or sleeping rough to the services available to them.' Police advised concerned property owners to report issues to their local council and referred inquiries about broader trends to the Crime Statistics Agency. Mark Donchi, manager of a Victorian homelessness program for St Mary's House of Welcome, said he doesn't encourage squatting but understands why it happens. He said his service has noticed a clear demographic shift, 'We're now seeing more families and single women coming to seek our services. The volume has definitely increased over the last five years.' Mr Donchi said that the increase is largely driven by a massive shortfall in affordable housing. 'And the process of getting into public housing is becoming longer and more complicated,' he said. However, Ms Ryan said for those on the receiving end of such activism, the consequences were anything but theoretical. If a squatter refuses to leave after being asked, the property owner must typically seek a possession order through legal channels — a process that can be lengthy and complex. Real estate agents say the process of removing unauthorised occupants from a property is far from straightforward, especially if the owner lives interstate. Mr Vorstenbosch said one of the problems was the lack of recourse for property owners if something happened to their homes. 'If the property owner is interstate, you can't even go through VCAT (Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal) anymore, you're redirected to the Magistrates Court, which can take up to six months. And that court isn't specialised in tenancy law, so mistakes happen.' But Mr van den Lamb argues that the real problem isn't scarcity, but distribution. 'At the last census, there were 30,000 people experiencing homelessness in Victoria. In metropolitan Melbourne alone, there are 100,000 empty homes... This isn't a supply issue. It's a distribution problem.' He also pushed back on criticism that his campaign might discourage landlords from renting out homes. 'These homes aren't being rented out,' he said. 'So that criticism doesn't really apply.' 'And if landlords are afraid to rent out homes that people could die in — then maybe that's a good thing, especially if we're talking about the substandard properties shown on Shit Rentals.' When asked whether he worked with homelessness services, he said there was 'informal collaboration' at times, but services were stretched. 'I think that would be unfortunately damaging to their reputations,' he said of formal partnerships, 'but I've spoken with many workers who have support and sympathy... and who've said there's literally nothing more they can do through their work.' Ms Ryan said for those on the receiving end of such activism, the consequences were anything but theoretical. 'As a society, we rely heavily on the private rental market,' Ms Ryan said. 'If we continue to make landlords feel vulnerable or vilified, we're only accelerating the very housing crisis we're trying to solve.'
Perth Now
7 hours ago
- Perth Now
Huge question in mushroom trial
Is Erin Patterson a cold and calculated killer, or an accidental poisoner who panicked fearing she would be blamed? That is the question jurors in Victorian mother's triple-murder trial will be tasked with answering. After seven weeks of evidence and four days of closing arguments from both sides of the bar table, the jury was sent home earlier on Thursday afternoon with a final message from Justice Christopher Beale. 'It is more important than ever that you have a good weekend,' the trial judge said. 'I really want you to come back refreshed on Tuesday.' Ms Patterson, 50, is facing trial after pleading not guilty to the murders of Don Patterson, Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson, and the attempted murder of Ian Wilkinson. Prosecutors allege she deliberately poisoned a beef wellington lunch for the two couples with death cap mushrooms, while her defence say it was a tragic accident. Erin Patterson denied she wanted to harm her in-laws. Brooke Grebert-Craig. Credit: Supplied The trial, now in its final stages, will hear from Justice Beale on Tuesday as he sums up the relevant law, evidence and arguments, and identifies the key issues jurors will need to determine. This week, Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC and defence barrister Colin Mandy SC had their final opportunity to address the jury. What the prosecution alleges Over two days, Dr Rogers took the jury through the evidence that showed, in her submission, why the jury should have no difficulty finding Ms Patterson intentionally sourced and included death caps in the lunch, intending to kill her guests. Dr Rogers said it was the Crown's case the accused woman saw and acted upon two posts to iNaturalist on April 28 and May 22, 2023, of death cap mushrooms in the Gippsland region. It's alleged she visited Loch 10 days after Christine McKenzie shared the sighting online, two hours before purchasing a Sunbeam Food Lab dehydrator. An image, located in the cache data of Google Photos on a tablet found at her home, depicted what mycologist Dr Tom May said was 'highly consistent' with death caps sitting on a dehydrator tray in her kitchen, the prosecutor said. Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC is leading the prosecution of Ms Patterson. NewsWire/ David Crosling Credit: News Corp Australia These had a last modified date on May 4, the jury was told. 'It is open for you to infer that having dehydrated death cap mushrooms, at some stage she blitzed them into a powder, as she admitted doing for other mushrooms, and, in that form, hid them in the lunch guests' beef wellington,' Dr Rogers submitted. Dr Rogers told the jury Ms Patterson's phone records captured a possible second visit to Loch on May 22 and Outtrim the same day, where Dr May posted a death cap sighting on May 21. The prosecutor alleged Ms Patterson invited her husband Simon Patterson and his four relatives to her home two weeks before the lunch under the pretence of wanting to discuss medical issues. Simon pulled out the evening before, while the four lunch guests arrived about 12.30pm at Ms Patterson's Leongatha home. Simon Patterson remains married to Erin Patterson. Picture. NewsWire/Nadir Kinani Credit: News Corp Australia After the lunch, it's alleged Ms Patterson raised a fabricated cancer diagnosis to explain away the 'otherwise unusual lunch invitation'. 'You might be wondering why on earth would she tell such a lie?' Dr Rogers asked. ' Well, the prosecution says that the accused never thought she would have to account for this lie … her lie would die with them.' Dr Rogers told the jury it was the Crown's case Ms Patterson prepared six individually portioned beef wellingtons – five containing death cap mushrooms – with the sixth 'clearly intended' for her husband should he have changed his mind. She pointed to evidence from Ian Wilkinson that the four guests ate off large grey dishes while Ms Patterson had a smaller 'orangey-tan' plate, and Simon's evidence that Heather told him she noticed the accused woman had a coloured plate that was 'different to the rest'. 'The only reason she would do that is because she knew that there were poisonous mushrooms in the other meals because she'd put them there, and to ensure that she could identify the sole non-poisonous meal,' Dr Rogers alleged. Each of the lunch guests began experiencing symptoms of nausea and vomiting later the same night and made their way to hospital the following morning. Pastor Ian Wilkinson recovered after about a month and a half in hospital. NewsWire/ David Crosling Credit: News Corp Australia By Tuesday, August 1, each was critically ill and in an induced coma at the Austin Hospital in Melbourne. Dr Rogers took the jury to Ms Patterson's first hospital attendance at 8.05am on July 31 – two days after the lunch. She told the court this was the first time Ms Patterson learned doctors suspected death cap mushroom poisoning. 'This is the moment, we suggest to you, that she realised that what she had done had not gone undetected. Her reaction: she wanted to leave,' Dr Rogers said. The jury was told Ms Patterson checked herself out of hospital against medical advice and returned 98 minutes later. Prosecutors say it is unclear what she did during this time, but argued her behaviour was not consistent with someone being told they'd potentially consumed a deadly toxin and their life was in danger. Dr Rogers said the Crown alleged the only 'logical explanation' was Ms Patterson knew very well she had not eaten death caps and had fled home to work out how to manage the situation. She returned to hospital at 9.48am, allegedly feigning being sick, and was transferred to the Monash Medical Centre in Melbourne. Ms Patterson has pleaded not guilty. NewsWire / Paul Tyquin Credit: News Corp Australia Dr Rogers told the jury Ms Patterson was discharged 24 hours after returning to hospital, with medical results showing no evidence of mushroom poisoning. The prosecutor alleged the accused woman's actions after returning home amounted to a 'cover up'. These included allegedly lying about feeding the leftovers, without the mushrooms and pastry, to her kids, dumping the food dehydrator used to dry death caps and handing a 'dummy phone' to police. 'Phone B, we say, is a dummy phone set up deliberately by the accused to trick the police and to conceal the existence and, most importantly, the contents of her usual mobile phone,' Dr Rogers said. As part of her closing address, Dr Rogers pointed to what the Crown allege are five 'calculated deceptions' they say lie at the heart of the case. These allegedly were; the fabricated cancer claim, the lethal dose of poison 'secreted' in a home cooked meal, Ms Patterson feigning being sick, the cover-up and the untruthful evidence given from the witness box. She told the jury understanding the deceptions would allow them to 'safely reject any reasonable possibility that this was a terrible accident' and allow them to find she committed each of the alleged crimes. 'We say there is no reasonable alternative explanation for what happened to the lunch guests, other than the accused deliberately sourced death cap mushrooms and deliberately included them in the meal she served them, with an intention to kill them,' Dr Rogers said. Simon's parents, Don and Gail Patterson, died a day apart in early August 2023. Supplied. Credit: Supplied She asked jurors to consider what they would have done if it was really a horrible accident. 'Would you go into self-preservation mode just worrying about protecting yourself from blame?' the prosecutor asked. 'No. That's not what you'd do. You would do everything you could to help the people you love.' What the defence say Colin Mandy SC, Ms Patterson's barrister, began his address by listing out 'two simple issues' he said the jury would have to determine. These were; is there a reasonable possibility that death cap mushrooms were put into this meal accidentally, and is there a reasonable possibility that his client did not intend to kill her guests. Mr Mandy argued the prosecution had taken a flawed approach to the case, starting with the theory that Ms Patterson was guilty and working backwards by cherry-picking convenient fragments and discarding inconvenient truths. Colin Mandy SC is spearheading Ms Patterson's defence. NewsWire/Ian Currie Credit: News Corp Australia The defence lawyer told jurors the prosecution had sought to paint Ms Patterson as a cold and calculated killer who had spent months planning this crime, but he questioned what possible reason she would have to kill. He said Ms Patterson had no motive to want her husband or in-laws dead, arguing the evidence actually showed she had 18 years' of 'anti-motive' with strong and loving relationships with Simon's parents. 'There's no possible prospect that Erin wanted in those circumstances to destroy her whole world, her whole life. Surely it's more likely that her account is true,' he said. 'Don and Gail had never been anything but kind and understanding to Erin Patterson. There was absolutely no reason at all for her to hurt them in any way at all.' Mr Mandy argued the prosecution had made much of a short dispute Ms Patterson had with Simon in December 2022 to show there was tension in the family dynamics. But he said even Simon agreed the spat over their children's schooling and finances had simmered down by the end that month showed it was 'an entirely unremarkable minor blow-up'. The trial has drawn an extensive media presence. NewsWire/ David Crosling Credit: News Corp Australia Mr Mandy took the jury to a series of disparaging messages Ms Patterson sent about her in-laws to her online friends and to Don and Gail themselves in December, remarking this was her being honest about her feelings and standing up for herself. 'This was an aberration in her dealings with the Pattersons, and there is nothing to say otherwise,' he said. 'It stands out in this case because it's the only one.' The defence barrister reminded jurors of what Ms Patterson said about the reason for the lunch itself; that she'd been feeling 'isolated' from Don and Gail in recent months and was proactively trying to build bridges. He again questioned if it was more likely that she wanted to kill everyone or that she wanted to reconnect for the sake of her children. Moving on to the lunch and Ian Wilkinson's evidence that Ms Patterson ate from an orangey-tan dish while the other guests ate from large grey plates, Mr Mandy said Ian must have been mistaken. He pointed to footage taken by police at her home on August 5 which showed a small collection of plates – none of them grey or orangey-tan – and Simon's evidence that Ms Patterson did not have sets of matching plates. This, Mr Mandy said, was backed up by the evidence of Ms Patterson and the two children. 'The prosecution says, 'No, no, no, Ian's right and they're all wrong',' he said. 'Or, in Erin's case, not wrong or honestly mistaken. In Erin's case she's lying.' Erin Patterson has maintained she did not want to harm anyone. Supplied. Credit: Supplied Mr Mandy suggested that it wouldn't make sense to use a different coloured plate to identify the unpoisoned meal, when it would be far simpler to mark the pastry. Turning to Ms Patterson's illness and actions after the lunch, Mr Mandy said she had told jurors she binge ate an orange cake Gail brought and made herself sick. He suggested that because she had not claimed she vomited immediately after the lunch, or that she saw the meal in her vomit it was more likely to be the truth. The defence barrister pointed to Ms Patterson's account of adding dried mushrooms to the duxelles when preparing the dish, thinking it tasted bland. He suggested jurors might think she continued to taste the dish, after accidentally adding death caps, and this would be a 'sensible reason why Erin became unwell earlier' than the others. Mr Mandy told the jury the evidence was Ms Patterson was sick, just not as sick as Don, Gail, Heather and Ian. He said the expert evidence was people could experience a range of illness severity even after eating the same meal. On Ms Patterson's account of feeding the leftovers of the lunch to her children for dinner a day later, Mr Mandy said there was no expert evidence to back up the Crown's claim this cannot be true because they did not get sick. 'We submit to you that's another invitation to speculation; to make an assumption rather than acting on the evidence,' he said. Heather Wilkinson died, while her husband Ian survived. Supplied Credit: Supplied Mr Mandy told the jury there had been no evidence in the trial about what level of exposure to death cap toxins was required to affect the body or that vomiting a meal would leave a presence of the toxins. He pointed to evidence Ms Patterson had elevated haemoglobin and fibrinogen and low potassium; which intensive care professor Andrew Bersten said supported a diarrhoeal illness. 'Medical testing revealed three different factors,' he said. 'Three things that can't be faked.' Turning to her decision to leave hospital 5 minutes after arriving on July 31, Mr Mandy explained that his client was not prepared for what she walked into. 'In our submission to you when she left the hospital at 8.10am, there is only one reasonable explanation for why that happened, and that is she had arrived thinking she would be admitted to get some fluids for gastro,' he said. Mr Mandy and his junior counsel barrister Sophie Stafford. NewsWire/Ian Currie Credit: News Corp Australia Instead she was subjected to an 'extremely intense five-minute interaction' and struggled to understand what she was being told. Mr Mandy told the court his client returned after doing what she said she needed to do to prepare and was admitted. He said it was on August 1, while in hospital in Melbourne, when Ms Patterson began to panic that she would be blamed for the illnesses. Mr Mandy told the court his client was not proud of the lies she told and the decisions she made, such as taking the dehydrator to the tip, but Ms Patterson was 'not on trial for being a liar'. 'She starts panicking and she starts lying from that point,' he said. 'All of the things that she did after the lunch fall into that category and none of them … can actually change what her intention was at the time of the lunch. Either she had the intention or she didn't. 'You can't change the past because you behave badly in the future.' Members of the Patterson and Wilkinson families have been present every day for the trial. NewsWire / David Geraghty Credit: News Corp Australia In the days after the lunch, the jury was told, Ms Patterson told dozens of doctors, public health authorities and police she used button mushrooms from Woolworths and dried mushrooms she had purchased in April that year from an Asian grocer in Melbourne. On the stand, she maintained this was the case but said she now believed she may have added foraged wild mushrooms to the same Tupperware container. The barrister said photos of wild mushrooms found on a SD card supported Ms Patterson's account of developing an interest in foraging and eating mushrooms during the early Covid lockdowns in 2020. Mr Mandy said this interest also explains why computer records show she briefly looked up death cap mushroom sightings on the citizen science website iNaturalist in May 2022. 'It makes perfect sense that in the context of that dawning interest … that she would become aware of death cap mushrooms,' he said. 'And the question occurred to her because she was picking mushrooms in the wild, do they grow in South Gippsland?' Mr Mandy told the jury his client did not have to take the stand, but chose to place herself under 'such an incredible amount of scrutiny' from an experienced prosecutor. 'She came through that unscathed,' he argued. 'Her account remained coherent and consistent, day after day after day, even when challenged, rapid fire, from multiple angles, repeatedly.' Finishing his closing address, the barrister argued the prosecution can't get over the high bar of beyond reasonable doubt. 'If you think at the end of your deliberations … is a possibility that this was an accident, a reasonable possibility, you must find her not guilty,' he said. The trial continues.
