Erin Patterson trial: Mushroom murder case ‘convoluted’

Lawyers acting for alleged mushroom poisoner Erin Patterson urged the jury to find her not guilty of all charges, labelling the prosecution case “convoluted”.

Lawyers acting for alleged mushroom poisoner Erin Patterson have finished delivering their closing remarks to the jury by urging them to find her not guilty.

“If you think at the end of your deliberations that it’s a possibility this was an accident, a reasonable possibility, you must find her not guilty,” defence barrister Colin Mandy SC said.

“Our submission to you is the prosecution can’t get over that high bar of beyond reasonable doubt.

“When you consider the actual evidence and consider it properly, methodically and analytically, your verdicts on these charges should be not guilty.”

Mr Mandy argued the prosecution had started with the assumption Ms Patterson must be responsible for the lunch guests falling ill and worked their way backwards, choosing the evidence that supported this and ignoring the evidence that did not. 

Erin Patterson has pleaded not guilty to three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder. Picture: 9News

He pointed to four “ridiculous and convoluted propositions” that he suggested underlined the issues in the Crown’s case.

First, he said, was the suggestion someone would do this without motive, arguing there was evidence of “18 years of what we call anti-motive, the reasons why she wouldn’t”.

Second, Mr Mandy said, was the theory that Ms Patterson used the “cancer lie” as a ruse to get the guests to attend.

The third proposition, he said, was that Ms Patterson believed the guests would take her cancer claim to the grave, suggesting this was “totally inconsistent” with Ms Patterson telling people about medical issues weeks before the lunch.

And finally, Mr Mandy said it was “illogical” that the prosecution believed Ms Patterson thought this illness would be passed off by authorities as a strange case of gastro.

Ms Patterson, 50, is facing trial accused of murdering three of her husband’s family members, and the attempted murder of a fourth, with a poisoned beef Wellington lunch on July 29, 2023.

Simon Patterson’s parents, Don and Gail Patterson, and aunt, Heather Wilkinson, died in the week following the lunch, while Ms Wilkinson’s husband, Ian Wilkinson, survived.

Prosecutors allege Ms Patterson deliberately sourced the deadly fungi and included it in the lunch intending to kill or at least seriously injure the four guests.

She has pleaded not guilty, with her defence arguing she did not intentionally poison the meal, labelling the case a tragic accident.

Mushroom cook ‘panicked’ after illnesses

The defence barrister moved on to a series of actions Ms Patterson made after the lunch which prosecutors argued are “incriminating conduct”.

These, he said, include her decision to dispose of a dehydrator, lying to police and factory resetting what prosecutors allege was a dummy phone.

“The law recognises that there might be all sorts of reasons why a person engages in conduct,” Mr Mandy said.

“There’s all sorts of reasons why an innocent person might engage in that sort of conduct.”

Lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson arrives at court with his daughters. Picture: NewsWire/Ian Currie

Mr Mandy said there was no “rule of human behaviour” that confirmed Ms Patterson’s actions would only be carried out if she was guilty.

“Erin got into the witness box and told you she panicked when confronted with the terrible realisation that her actions had caused the deaths of the people she loved,” he said.

“The stupid thing she did is factory reset Phone B a couple of times, it’s entirely consistent with someone who panicked because there was nothing to be achieved by factory resetting Phone B.”

‘Reasonable explanation’ behind decision to leave hospital

Mr Mandy has turned to Ms Patterson’s decision to leave hospital five minutes after arriving, suggesting there’s “only one reasonable explanation”.

Previously the jury was told Ms Patterson first presented to Leongatha Hospital two days after the lunch on July 31 at 8.05am, leaving against medical advice at 8.10am, before returning at 9.48am.

Barrister Colin Mandy SC will continue his closing address on Thursday. Picture: NewsWire / Diego Fedele

He told the court Ms Patterson attended thinking she had gastro and needed a bag of saline, remarking she was “not prepared for what she walked into”.

Mr Mandy said there was immediately a “laser focus” on death cap mushrooms by hospital staff.

“It was an extremely intense five-minute interaction where she was told she’d be admitted and transferred to a hospital in Melbourne,” he said.

“She was not refusing treatment, she was saying there were things she needed to do … her brain was stuck on that.”

Judge’s ‘second Easter’ comment prompts laugh

Returning to court on Thursday morning, Justice Christopher Beale gave jurors an update on the next week of the trial.

He said Mr Mandy was expected to conclude on Thursday and jurors would be sent home so legal arguments could commence.

Justice Beale said he wouldn’t be starting his “charge” until Tuesday, giving the jury a long weekend.

“I will be sending you home again, think of it as second Easter,” he said to laughs from the jury.

“We’ll get stuck into it on Tuesday.

“My charge will take at least two days — I’m working hard to try and compress it but there’s quite a lot of information to deal with.”

Prosecutors Jane Warren and Nanette Rogers SC have led the case against Ms Patterson. Picture: NewsWire/Ian Currie

Cook did not want husband dead

During his closing address to the jury on Wednesday, Mr Mandy said there was “no possible prospect” Ms Patterson wanted to kill her husband.

His comment came after prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC suggested the sixth beef wellington Ms Patterson had prepared was “clearly intended” for her husband Simon.

“The prosecution case is: Had Simon Patterson changed his mind and decided to attend the lunch after all, he, too, would have been served that sixth poisoned beef wellington,” she said on Monday.

Previously the jury was told Ms Patterson had prepared six beef wellingtons – one more than the number of people present at the lunch.

In the witness box the accused woman disputed the sixth was intended for her husband, saying it was just an “extra one” made because she had the ingredients and the steaks used came in twin packs.

Dr Rogers pointed to the accused woman’s evidence that if Simon had attended, she would have given him a beef Wellington too, and Ms Patterson’s final message to her husband after he told her the night before the lunch he wouldn’t come.

“I hope you’ll change your mind. Your parents and Heather and Ian are coming at 12.30. I hope to see you there,” the message read.

Simon Patterson told the jury the pair remained married. Picture: NewsWire / David Geraghty

Mr Mandy told the jury it was “obvious from the tone of the message” his client did want him to come and was trying to guilt him into coming.

“The prosecution says the only reason she wanted him there was because she wanted to kill him as well. And that’s, we say, an absurd theory,” he said.

“That would have had the result of removing from the children’s lives their father, their grandparents, Simon’s aunt and uncle.

“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.”

Also on Wednesday, Mr Mandy said he expected to conclude his remarks on Thursday morning.

The update follows Justice Beale advising jurors earlier this week that he would wait until Monday to begin his summing up of the case and charge, and he expected this would take a couple of days.

The jury would then be sent out to deliberate.

The trial, now in its eighth week, continues.

Originally published as Erin Patterson trial: Mushroom murder case ‘convoluted’