Latest news with #Leongatha
The Guardian
13 hours ago
- The Guardian
Closing arguments conclude in Australia's mushroom trial as jury deliberation approaches
Closing addresses from the prosecution and defence have now concluded in the triple murder trial of Erin Patterson. Next it will be up to the jury to deliberate and reach a unanimous verdict. Patterson faces three charges of murder and one charge of attempted murder relating to a lunch she served at her house in Victoria's Leongatha on 29 July 2023. She has pleaded not guilty to murdering three relatives of her estranged husband, Simon Patterson, and attempting to murder another. Guardian Australia's justice and courts reporter, Nino Bucci, has been attending the trial since it began, and explains the latest developments
The Guardian
15 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘Calculated deceptions' and ‘ridiculous' propositions: what the Erin Patterson jury heard in the final week of her triple-murder trial
The prosecution and defence in Erin Patterson's triple-murder trial concluded their closing addresses this week. Jurors are expected to retire next week – week nine of the trial – to consider their verdicts. Before their deliberations, Justice Christopher Beale will instruct the jury. Patterson, 50, faces three charges of murder and one charge of attempted murder relating to a beef wellington lunch she served at her house in Leongatha, in regional Victoria, on 29 July 2023. She has pleaded not guilty to the charges. Here's what the jury heard from each side in their closing remarks. The crown's case is centred on 'four calculated deceptions' it says were made by Patterson. Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC outlined these to jurors on Monday: 1. First, the 'fabricated' cancer claim Patterson used as a pretence for inviting guests to the beef wellington lunch on 29 July 2023. Evidence in the trial from various family members showed the lunch invitation was a 'very unusual occurrence', Rogers said. Patterson 'knew how to tell convincing lies' about cancer 'because she had put in the research', the court heard. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email 2. The 'lethal doses' of poison 'secreted' into the beef wellingtons Patterson cooked for her guests. Rogers labelled this 'the critical deception' – that Patterson deliberately sought out death cap mushrooms and added the toxic fungi to the beef wellingtons. Patterson deviated from the recipe she claimed she used, which called for a single dish to be cut into smaller serves, instead making individual beef wellingtons to ensure she would not accidentally consume death cap mushrooms, Rogers said. 3. Patterson attempted to make it seem as if she had also suffered death cap mushroom poisoning from the meal in the days after. The jury should reject the defence's suggestion that Patterson suffered a 'mild' version of death cap mushroom poisoning, Rogers said. She did this to make it appear that she ate exactly the same meal as her guests, the court heard. The totality of the medical evidence showed Patterson did not suffer death cap mushroom poisoning but tried to make it appear as if she did, Rogers said. Sign up to Afternoon Update Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion 4. The 'sustained' cover-up Patterson engaged in to conceal the truth. When Patterson realised death cap mushroom poisoning was suspected, she lied and 'acted deceptively' to deflect blame and suspicion about what she had done, the prosecution said. Rogers pointed to Patterson lying about feeding her children leftovers from the meal, with mushrooms scraped off, and lying about all the mushrooms coming from Woolworths and an Asian grocer – lies the defence disputes. The prosecution also highlighted Patterson dumping her Sunbeam dehydrator at a local tip four days after the lunch. 5. Rogers said Patterson also engaged in a fifth deception – giving 'untruthful evidence' to the jury when she testified in her trial. During her eight days in the witness box, Rogers said the accused told a 'carefully constructed narrative to fit with the evidence – almost'. 'There are some inconsistencies that she just cannot account for so she ignores them, says she can't remember those conversations, or says other people are just wrong, even her own children,' Rogers said. 1. Patterson's defence lawyer, Colin Mandy SC, told the jury the trial boiled down to two simple issues they needed to determine. First, was there a reasonable possibility that death cap mushrooms were put into the lunch accidentally? Second, was there a reasonable possibility that Patterson did not intend to kill or cause serious injury to her guests? 'If either of those is a reasonable possibility, on all of the evidence, then you find her not guilty,' he said. 2. Mandy outlined the top four 'ridiculous' and 'convoluted' propositions of the crown's case. He urged the jury to reject these, the first being that Patterson would commit the alleged offences without a motive. Mandy said a thorough investigation, including the analysis of electronic devices, messages exchanged with her online friends, and evidence from family witnesses, found 18 years' worth of 'anti-motive evidence' – reasons why she would not want to do anything to her guests. 3. Mandy said the prosecution's argument about the 'cancer lie as a ruse' to entice Patterson's lunch guests to her home should also be rejected. He disputed it by pointing to evidence she told none of her guests about it before the lunch and only told them after they ate the beef wellington meal. 4. The prosecution's argument that Patterson believed the lunch guests would take the cancer secret to the grave with them was 'illogical', Mandy said. Patterson had told people about medical issues weeks before the lunch and her estranged husband, Simon, knew about it and did not attend the fateful meal. 'The whole world could have known about it by the time the lunch was over,' Mandy said. 5. Mandy challenged the prosecution's theory that Patterson, knowing her guests would become ill, thought that it would be passed off as a 'strange case of gastro where everyone died, except her'. The defence argued their client's actions in the days after the lunch were reflective of her panicking about being blamed for the deadly lunch.
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Daily Mail
Why the Erin Patterson trial is like an Olympic high jump event - as defence says their client is not an atheist
Erin Patterson is a God-fearing mother who had every reason to want her lunch guests alive, a jury has heard. On Thursday, Patterson's barrister Colin Mandy, SC compared the trial to the sport of high jump as he finally completed his defence to the jury, which has been sitting on the trial for eight long weeks. Patterson, 50, has pleaded not guilty to the murders of Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson. They died after consuming death cap mushrooms served in beef Wellingtons during lunch at her Leongatha home on July 29, 2023. Only Pastor Ian Wilkinson survived the lunch, with a charge of attempted murder also hanging over Patterson's head. Mr Mandy urged the jury not to believe any suggestions that his client had not been a legitimate Christian. 'Erin Patterson was not an atheist,' he said. The suggestion had been made at the beginning of the trial when a witness who had been in a Facebook group with Patterson claimed she had told them she was one. The jury heard Patterson had been an atheist when she met Simon, but converted to Christianity as a result of his influence. Mr Mandy said members from a smaller chat group that Patterson was in weren't asked questions about her religious beliefs by the prosecution. 'As to what Erin's religious beliefs might be, and that's an example we say of picking and choosing the evidence that suits them and ignoring the others. 'Picking a misleading, we say, piece of evidence about her being two-faced and constructing a theory around that and ignoring the overwhelming weight of the other evidence that points in the opposite direction.' Mr Mandy had been critical of Crown prosecutor Dr Nanette Rogers' closing address to the jury earlier this week, suggesting she had mislead the jurors by cherry-picking evidence to suit her narrative. He told the jury the prosecution had a 'high bar' to leap to establish Patterson was guilty of murder. 'A trial like this sometimes seems like a competition - naturally, one side against another, like we're competing against each other like a boxing match or a football match or netball - or whatever it is,' Mr Mandy said. 'The truth is, it is more like the high jump. This is important. Only the prosecution has to get over the bar. 'Defence doesn't have to do anything. Defence doesn't have to jump any bar. Erin Patterson doesn't have to jump any bar at all.' Mr Mandy said if the jury thought his client 'maybe' deliberately poisoned the meal, it must find her not guilty. 'If you think that she probably deliberately poisoned the meal, you must find her not guilty,' he continued. 'If you think it's possible that she intended to kill or cause really serious injury to Don, or Gail or Heather, you must find her not guilty. 'If you think maybe she intended those things, then you must find her not guilty.' 'If you think probably she intended those things, you must find her not guilty.' 'And if you think it's possible Erin intended to kill Ian, you have to find her not guilty. Maybe she intended to kill Ian: not guilty.' Mr Mandy claimed to the the jury it had been sold 'convoluted' and 'ridiculous' propositions by Dr Rogers during her closing address. These included that Patterson would murder without any motive to do so and lie about cancer to get her guests to attend the lunch. He further dismissed the prosecution view that Patterson believed her lunch guests would 'take her secrets (about her medical issues) to the grave with them'. Mr Mandy suggested there was no way his client would have committed the crime knowing she would be under the spotlight of investigators. The jury heard Patterson ought be commended for choosing to enter the witness box and facing off with Dr Rogers in person. 'When she chose to do it, she made that decision as an innocent person,' Mr Mandy said. Mr Mandy said Patterson had answered questions carefully, 'even pedantic', he said. 'You would not have had the impression that she was trying to charm you or persuade you,' Mr Mandy said. 'She was going about the job she had.' He explained his client had told lies after the lunch, dumped her dehydrator and wiped her mobile phone in acts of sheer panic. The wiping of her phone, Mr Mandy told the jury, had been a 'stupid thing'. Listen to The Trial Of Erin Patterson on your favourite streaming platform 'There's all sorts of reasons why an innocent person can engage in that type of behaviour,' he said. 'Erin got into the witness box and told you she did those things because she panicked when confronted with the terrible possibility, the terrible realisation, that her actions had caused the illness of the people she loved.' Mr Mandy said she told the truth even when it was 'deeply embarrassing' and admitted she told lies. He declared that his client came out of extensive cross-examination 'unscathed'. 'Her account remained coherent and consistent day after day,' he said. Mr Mandy insisted his client is and had always been innocent of the charges. 'Our submission is the prosecution case cannot get over that high bar of beyond reasonable doubt,' he said.
ABC News
2 days ago
- ABC News
Erin Patterson mushroom murder trial live: Defence addresses the jury
Erin Patterson's defence lawyer is continuing his closing address to the jury, as the Victorian woman's triple-murder trial nears the end of its eighth week. Ms Patterson has pleaded not guilty to killing three of her family members and the attempted murder of a fourth by serving them poisonous death cap mushrooms in a lunch at her Leongatha home in 2023. Follow today's court hearing in our live blog. To stay up to date with this story, subscribe to ABC News.
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Daily Mail
Erin Patterson mushroom murder trial LIVE updates: Defence wraps up its case as marathon murder trial enters its final days
Murder trial winding up before jury handed the time to decide accused killer's fate Lead defence barrister Colin Mandy SC commenced his closing address to the jury in the Erin Patterson murder trial on Tuesday afternoon. Mr Mandy, who is expected to wrap up his closing address today, called the prosecution's case 'flawed' and even labelled an aspect of the case a 'charade'. Crown prosecutor Dr Nanette Rogers wrapped up her closing address to the jury just before lunch on Tuesday. Justice Christopher Beale has indicated he will commence his 'charge' to the jury after Mr Mandy has concluded his closing address. Justice Beale already indicated to the jury his final instructions will go for several days. The closings followed Patterson who entered the witness box for her eighth and final day in her own marathon murder trial last Thursday. Dozens of members of the public have braved the cold to queue up outside (pictured) the courthouse very early each morning to get a front row seat in the courtroom. Patterson, 50, is accused of murdering her in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson, after allegedly serving them a beef Wellington lunch made with death cap mushrooms. Patterson is also accused of attempting to murder Heather's husband, pastor Ian Wilkinson, who survived the lunch after spending several weeks in an intensive care unit. The court heard Patterson's estranged husband, Simon, was also invited to the gathering at her home in Leongatha, in Victoria's Gippsland region, but didn't attend. Witnesses told the jury that Patterson ate her serving from a smaller, differently-coloured plate to those of her guests, who ate off four grey plates. Patterson told authorities she bought dried mushrooms from an unnamed Asian store in the Monash area of Melbourne, but health inspectors could find no evidence of this.
