Erin Patterson trial: Defence continues closing address in alleged mushroom poisoning case
Claims alleged poisoner Erin Patterson sought out death cap mushrooms months ahead of a lunch with her in-laws have been rubbished by her defence as “total speculation”.
Breaking News
Don't miss out on the headlines from Breaking News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Claims alleged poisoner Erin Patterson sought out the deadly death cap mushrooms months out from the lunch have been rubbished by her defence as “total speculation”.
Continuing his final remarks on Wednesday, defence barrister Colin Mandy SC turned to the Crown’s theory that Ms Patterson visited death cap mushroom sightings in Loch on April 28 and May 22 and Outtrim on May 22, 2023.
He said the case “in a nutshell” was she was familiar with iNaturalist because she used the site 14 months prior and may have visited locations 15 minutes from her home.
The defence barrister told the jury the prosecution had argued Ms Patterson picked enough death cap mushrooms to kill five people on April 28 because of an image showing mushrooms consistent with the deadly fungi on a dehydrator tray that was last modified on May 4.
Mr Mandy raised a number of concerns about this theory, including that Christine McKenzie, who posted the Loch sighting, had removed all the mushrooms she could see.
The retired pharmacist told the jury there was “absolutely” a risk they could regrow, but Mr Mandy said no question had been asked about this to the mushroom expert Dr Tom May.
He argued Dr May qualified his opinion that the mushrooms on the dehydrator tray had a “high degree of confidence” based on what he could see, but they could also be other species.
Mr Mandy then questioned why Ms Patterson would return on May 22 if she’d sourced enough death caps on April 28.
“Are we in a world of total speculation?” he asked rhetorically.
“Are they death cap mushrooms? You can’t reason confidently about that.
“Did she go to Loch? You can’t reason confidently about that.
“Were there even death cap mushrooms to be found in Loch? You can’t reason confidently about that.”
Mr Mandy said Dr May had ultimately agreed poisonous mushroom identification is “fraught with challenges”.
“His experience is the general public, Erin Patterson for instance, has a poor ability to accurately identify mushrooms,” he said.
Mr Mandy labelled the Crown’s allegation that a sixth beef wellington was prepared for her husband Simon Patterson, should he change his mind and attend the lunch, as an “absurd theory”.
“There’s no possible prospect that Erin wanted to destroy her whole world, her whole life,” he said.
Ms Patterson, 50, is facing trial accused of murdering Don and Gail and Gail’s sister Heather Wilkinson and attempting to murder Ms Wilkinson’s husband Ian with a poisoned beef wellington on July 29, 2023.
She has pleaded not guilty, telling the jury she did not intentionally poison her lunch guests nor want them harmed.
Defence maintain Erin fell sick after lunch
The defence barrister turned to his client’s account of feeling ill in the hours after the lunch, posing the question; “is it possible she didn’t get as sick?”
He told the jury Ms Patterson had given evidence of having loose stools in the afternoon, suggesting she feel ill sooner than her guests because she was “tasting” the mushroom duxelles hours before the lunch.
“That’s why she added the dried mushrooms to it,” Mr Mandy said.
“So at least a few hours before anyone else had some, she had tasted it.”
Mr Mandy also pointed to Ms Patterson’s evidence of binge eating an orange cake after her guests had left and making herself sick.
He said if she was lying, as the prosecution claimed, then why didn’t she say it was immediately following the lunch or she saw parts of the beef wellington.
“If she was lying to you she would say ‘oh when I threw up I could clearly recognise pastry and meat and mushroom’,” the barrister said.
“Instead she says I don’t know, it was vomit.”
‘Terrible lie’: Defence addresses cancer claim
Moving on to the prosecution’s claim Ms Patterson used a fake cancer diagnosis as a “ruse” to initiate the lunch, Mr Mandy took the jury through what he said the evidence showed.
He suggested the more likely explanation was the one Ms Patterson gave; that she felt there was some distance with her in-laws and wanted to be proactive in maintaining the relationship.
Mr Mandy said Ms Patterson told Don and Gail about a lump on her elbow that she was worried about in about June 2023 and, once the issue resolved itself, chose to use it as cover for weight-loss surgery.
He told the jury that in a murder trial where the prosecution criticised every misstep, this could seem like a “terrible lie”.
But in the context of Ms Patterson’s longstanding struggles with her weight and depression, Mr Mandy argued the “small lie” seemed more understandable.
“Those things are private and deeply embarrassing,” he said.
Mr Mandy told the jury that with the knowledge of the frailty of memory, Ms Patterson’s account of hinting to her lunch guests that she may need treatment in regards to the lump was not so different to Ian Wilkinson’s testimony and what Simon said his father told him about the lunch.
He also questioned why, on the Crown’s case, Ms Patterson waited until after the meal to bring up her cancer diagnosis.
“If this was a ruse, there was no need to have a conversation,” the barrister said.
“On the Crown case, her objective had already been achieved.”
Erin ‘categorically’ had interest in wild mushrooms
Mr Mandy turned his attention to the evidence of Ms Patterson’s interest in wild mushrooms, which the prosecution has suggested was made up.
He took the jury to photos of wild mushrooms, dated to April and May 2020, located by police on a SD card in Ms Patterson’s home.
“These photographs demonstrate categorically she was interested in wild mushrooms during that time,” he said.
“Its not made up, it’s not fabricated; that’s the evidence. People become interested in mushrooms during the Covid lockdowns.”
Turning to evidence a Cooler Master computer was used to look up sightings of death cap mushrooms on the iNaturalist website on May 28, 2022, Mr Mandy said there “little doubt” it was Ms Patterson.
“It makes perfect sense in the context of that dawning interest … she would become aware of death caps,” he said.
“They are the, I think this is the evidence, the deadliest mushroom in the world.”
Mr Mandy suggested Ms Patterson had visited the web site while looking up the question; “do they grow in South Gippsland,” with the evidence showing at the time there was no recorded instances on iNaturalist.
Returning to the topic later in the day, Mr Mandy said the evidence showed that Ms Patterson spent two minutes looking at the iNaturalist website before ordering dinner.
“This interaction was idle curiosity … this was not someone doing deep research,” he argued.
He said there was “not one scrap of evidence” that Ms Patterson had observed the two death cap mushroom sightings in Loch and Outtrim the prosecution suggested she could have used to source the poisonous fungi.
“On the Crown’s case, you might think remarkably, extraordinarily Erin Patterson observed and acted on the only two sightings of death cap mushrooms ever in South Gippsland,” Mr Mandy said.
“How likely is that?”
Erin’s messages a ‘distraction’: court
Mr Mandy turned to evidence the prosecution had led about tension in Ms Patterson’s relationship with her husband Simon and his parents Don and Gail in December 2022.
He said a “fair reading” of the messages was that the estranged couple were being petty amid a dispute over their children’s schooling and finances.
“Our submission is it’s an entirely unremarkable minor blow up,” he said.
“It stands out in this case because it’s the only one. These people are eternally polite to one another.”
Mr Mandy argued the messages actually depicted Ms Patterson being honest about being hurt and standing up for herself.
They (the prosecution) say to you ignore the long history of love and support … and instead rely on three days of upset from Erin and recollections of these online friends,” he said.
“This was an aberration in her dealings with the Pattersons and there’s nothing to say otherwise.”
The defence barrister suggested the prosecution, who have not put forward a motive for the alleged crimes, had focused on these messages in an attempt to “undermine that Erin had a loving, supportive and respectful relationship with Don and Gail”.
Context of alleged poisoner’s relationships ‘important’
The defence barrister told the jury Ms Patterson’s relationships with her husband Simon and his family would be an important part of their consideration of the case.
He argued there was a wealth of evidence from witnesses in the case Ms Patterson had positive relationships with her in-laws and the wider Patterson family.
Turning to her estranged husband, Mr Mandy said the evidence was in the seven years since their separation there was no animosity and no awkwardness until a dispute in December 2022.
“If there were disagreements they were resolved smoothly and respectfully,” he said.
“It says a lot about the relationship.”
Mr Mandy said there was “no sign” to anyone else the relationship was anything but a good separation, arguing this was the context in which the alleged crimes occurred.
Alleged poisoner’s lies don’t prove guilt: court
Continuing his final remarks to the jury on Wednesday, Mr Mandy argued the Crown had invited the jury to engage in hindsight reasoning by asking them to consider what they would have done.
“What hindsight reasoning does is shift the burden of proof onto the defence,” he said.
“When the prosecution asks what you would have done they’re asking you to convict Ms Patterson based on deviation from some assumed norm.”
Mr Mandy told the jury his client was “not on trial for being a liar” and had told them herself she regrets her lies.
“The lies in the days afterwards, everything she does in the days afterwards doesn’t change the intention of the meal,” he said.
“It biases the assessment of intent and state of mind.”
The submission comes after Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC asked the jury to consider what they would have done in Ms Patterson’s situation if the poisoned lunch was an accident on Tuesday.
“Would you go into self-preservation mode just worrying about protecting yourself from blame?” Dr Rogers asked.
“No. That’s not what you’d do. You would do everything you could to help the people you love.”
Update in mushroom murder trial
As the jury returned from an afternoon break on Tuesday, Justice Christopher Beale advised the 14-person panel he would be waiting until next week to deliver his charge.
“Just to keep you in the loop in relation to timelines, I won’t commence my charge to you until Monday,” the judge said.
“That charge is not likely to finish, let’s say this, it may spill over to Wednesday. With the wind at my back, I might finish it by Tuesday afternoon.
“But I just tell you that so you can organise your affairs and I’ll give you another update as we go along.”
After the completion of the evidence in the case last week, Justice Beale told jurors he expected the closing arguments to take a couple of days each, before he begun his charge.
He said his charge would involve three parts; directions about legal principles, identifying the key issues in the case and summarising the evidence and arguments.
On Tuesday, Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC wrapped her final address by arguing there was no reasonable alternative explanation for what happened other than Ms Patterson deliberately sourcing death caps and including them in the meal intending to kill.
Mr Mandy, on the other hand, begun his address by arguing the Crown had “cherry picked” facts to support their hypothesis and ignored others.
“Erin Patterson had a motive to keep these people in her world so that they could keep supporting her and her children … why would she take wonderful, active, loving grandparents away from her own children?” he questioned.
The trial, now in its eighth week, continues.
Originally published as Erin Patterson trial: Defence continues closing address in alleged mushroom poisoning case
Origin alive after epic Maroons upset
In true underdog style Queensland weathered a storm of criticism after game one and then a stunning NSW comeback in game two to seal an Origin win for the ages.
Read more
Khamenei says Iran will ‘never surrender’, warns off US
Khamenei says Iran will 'never surrender', warns off US
Read more