Erin Patterson murder trial day 27 as it happened: ‘You thought the lunch guests would die’: A rare invitation and a ‘lie about cancer’

It was rare for Erin Patterson to host guests; having four people over for a meal was not an ordinary, casual event for the mother of two.

Patterson told a jury in her murder trial that her beef Wellington lunch – to which she invited her estranged husband’s parents, Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail’s sister and her husband – Heather and Ian Wilkinson – was not a casual gathering she frequently put on.

After a full day in the witness box, Patterson, 50, confirmed that before that July 29, 2023, lunch she had never hosted the Wilkinsons before.

Erin Patterson, her in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson (bottom right), and Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson (top right).Credit: Matthew Absalom-Wong

During cross-examination, Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers asked questions focused on the purpose of the lunch and why those guests were invited.

She then put to Patterson, who is on trial for the murder of Don, Gail, and Heather, and the attempted murder of Ian, whether she had lied about her health to ensure the guests would attend and to explain the children’s absence.

Patterson, her long brown hair out in the witness box for a fourth consecutive day, told the court that this was incorrect.

“I suggest you never thought you’d have to account for this lie about having cancer because you thought the lunch guests would die,” Rogers said.

“That’s not true,” Erin responded.

Today’s evidence has now concluded.

• Erin Patterson tells court she didn’t intend to kill or cause serious harm by serving the beef Wellington meal.
• The prosecution’s cross-examination of Erin Patterson begins.
• Senior Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, rapidly takes Patterson through a string of exhibits.
• Patterson denies deliberately lacing beef Wellingtons with death caps.
• Rogers grills Patterson about what she told doctors after the fatal lunch.
• The prosecution quizzes Patterson about “eye-roll emojis” on a group chat message about Don Patterson.
• Patterson denies she announced she had been diagnosed with cancer at the mushroom lunch.
• Patterson said it was rare for her to host guests and that she had not had the Wilkinsons over for a meal before.
  Read a recap of the day in full here.
  Join us in the next live coverage.

The questions came thick and fast. The denials did, too.

After three days and 30 minutes of softly spoken, slow questioning from defence lawyer Colin Mandy, SC, accused killer cook Erin Patterson was now under cross-examination.

Crown Prosecutor Dr Nanette Rogers, SC, leaves court on Thursday.Credit: Jason South

Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers, SC, rose to her feet quickly, on her lectern a blue binder folder filled with A4 notes.

In quick succession she took Erin Patterson through a string of exhibits. More than a dozen flicked across screens in the courtroom – invoices, photographs.

With about five metres between them, Rogers’ voice carried easily across the room. The accused, on the other hand, was asked to speak up.

Rogers cut to the chase in the first 10 minutes.

Read Erin Pearson and Marta Pascual Juanola’s full report on what it was like to witness the cross-examination of Erin Patterson on Thursday here.

Here are some pictures taken outside the courthouse in Morwell by this masthead’s award-winning photographer, Jason South, earlier today.

It was rare for Erin Patterson to host guests; having four people over for a meal was not an ordinary, casual event for the mother of two.

Patterson told a jury in her murder trial that her beef Wellington lunch – to which she invited her estranged husband’s parents, Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail’s sister and her husband – Heather and Ian Wilkinson – was not a casual gathering she frequently put on.

After a full day in the witness box, Patterson, 50, confirmed that before that July 29, 2023, lunch she had never hosted the Wilkinsons before.

Erin Patterson, her in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson (bottom right), and Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson (top right).Credit: Matthew Absalom-Wong

During cross-examination, Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers asked questions focused on the purpose of the lunch and why those guests were invited.

She then put to Patterson, who is on trial for the murder of Don, Gail, and Heather, and the attempted murder of Ian, whether she had lied about her health to ensure the guests would attend and to explain the children’s absence.

Patterson, her long brown hair out in the witness box for a fourth consecutive day, told the court that this was incorrect.

“I suggest you never thought you’d have to account for this lie about having cancer because you thought the lunch guests would die,” Rogers said.

“That’s not true,” Erin responded.

Today’s evidence has now concluded.

Erin Patterson, after a full day in the witness box in her own murder trial, is currently facing cross-examination regarding her relationship with her estranged husband, Simon, in 2022.

Prosecutor Nanette Rogers pressed Patterson on financial disputes with Simon, including his tax returns and school fees, with Patterson admitting she sought her in-laws’ help to influence Simon’s behaviour.

The 50-year-old accused, dressed in a paisley top and black pants, disputed earlier trial evidence that Simon had offered to amend his tax return.

Erin Patterson and Simon Patterson.

She told the court she was not upset about the prospect of him amending his tax return – the change meant she could claim payments.

As part of her questioning, Rogers directed Patterson to a message she sent her in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, about school fees, where she told them she wanted Simon “to do the right thing by his children”.

Patterson said she was not seeking support from Don and Gail to get Simon to pay for the fees – rather, she wanted to get her in-laws to help improve her communication with Simon.

“I wanted Don and Gail to help Simon and I communicate better about it and in some ways I think I was ... I thought that if Don and Gail knew ... if Simon knew that Don and Gail knew how he was behaving he would change his behaviour,” Patterson said.

Asked by Rogers what she meant when she told her in-laws that she wanted Simon to do the right thing by his children, Patterson struggled to explain her thinking at the time.

“I think it was more of a global proposition because whether he paid the school fees or not it wasn’t going to change whether the children went to school or not, but I’m finding it hard to explain what I meant by that,” she said.

Patterson said that in some ways, she was “reconstructing backwards”.

During cross-examination, senior Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers challenged Erin Patterson on whether she had sought advice from child support worker Katrina Cripps regarding how to discuss her purported health issues with her children, with Patterson saying her concerns were purely logistical, not about needing advice for a serious illness.

The following exchange ensued:

Patterson: I think it’s more accurate to say that I’d been talking to them about how to manage the children. My concern was about logistics of the children.

Rogers: Yes, and I’m asking you about advice.

Patterson: I don’t remember anything about advice.

Rogers: I suggest you didn’t need any advice at the time because there was nothing to tell the children and this was a continuation of your pretence that you had told others you had a serious health issue.

Patterson: Don and Gail yes.

In the cross-examination, accused triple murderer Erin Patterson is facing questioning about conversations surrounding her purported cancer diagnosis, particularly what she conveyed to both her father-in-law, Don Patterson, and a child support worker.

Senior Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers has directed Patterson to evidence given by her estranged husband, Simon, earlier in the trial. Simon told the jury that his dad had told him at Korumburra Hospital that Erin might undergo chemotherapy and surgery on July 30, 2023.

Gail and Don Patterson.

“I don’t remember saying I’d had a diagnosis,” she said.

Patterson said she disputed that she had said that they had found ovarian cancer, and that she said that she expected to have chemo and potentially surgery.

“I don’t think I was that specific,” she said.

Patterson told the jury that she “might have said it”, but wasn’t certain. Patterson told the court that there was “nothing to tell the kids” and she never intended to inform them about it.

When Rogers asked whether she had told child support worker Katrina Cripps that she had invited her lunch guests to discuss a medical issue, Patterson said that was incorrect.

Rogers: Mrs Cripps is wrong is she?

Patterson: Yes.

Rogers: Mrs Cripps also gave evidence that you told her that you wanted advice on how to approach this issue with the children.

Patterson: My memory of that conversation is that she was telling me things they had been told by Simon and communicating that to me.

Rogers: I am very unclear about that response. What I am putting to you is the evidence that Katrina Crips gave of what you told Mrs Cripps.

Patterson said her memory of the conversation was different.

Rogers: Did you tell Katrina Cripps that you wanted advice on how to approach this issue with your children?

Patterson: Something like that yeah.

Rogers: To be very clear I am suggesting you did tell Katrina Cripps that you invited [them] to discuss a medical issue.

Patterson said they had discussed the reason for the lunch “because that was not the reason for the invitation”.

Rogers: I am asking you, is it your evidence that at no stage did you tell Cripps that you had the lunch to discuss a medical issue.

Patterson: That’s correct I did not tell her that.

Resuming her cross-examination, senior Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers pressed Erin Patterson on the details of what she communicated to her lunch guests about her health.

Rogers referred Patterson to part of her evidence yesterday, where she said she had misled her lunch guests to believe that she might need medical treatment after disclosing she had experienced health issues that led her to believe she had ovarian cancer.

Don and Gail Patterson.

“I can’t remember the exact words I used, as to whether I said I had or I might need to ... but I was trying to communicate that there might be some treatment coming up, but I really can’t give you any precision about the words I used,” Patterson said.

Patterson agreed that she had wanted her lunch guests to believe that she would be needing treatment for cancer. However, she disagreed that she had told the group that she had a cancer diagnosis.

Erin Patterson has denied telling her lunch guests on July 29, 2023, that she had a cancer diagnosis.

The jury is being shown a message sent by Patterson to her mother-in-law, Gail Patterson, on July 7, 2023, that read:

Thanks for your message Don and Gail there’s a bit to digest with everything that’s come out of it. I might talk more about it with you both when I see you in person.

The court heard that nine days after that, the accused mother-of-two invited Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson to her home in Leongatha for lunch.

Asked by senior Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers about why she suggested they might talk more about it in person, Patterson responded she hadn’t decided to have lunch on July 29, 2023, at that point.

Rogers: Did you tell people at the lunch that you had cancer?

Patterson: No.

Rogers: Did you say to your guests at the lunch that you were very concerned because you believed it was very serious, life-threatening?

Patterson: I don’t remember using those words.

Rogers: What words did you use?

Patterson: I can’t remember the precise words, but I do know what I was trying to communicate was that … I am undergoing investigations around ovarian cancers that might need treatment in that regard in the future. I can’t say that that was the specific words that I used, but that’s what I remember I was wanting to communicate.

Erin Patterson is being cross-examined by prosecutor Nanette Rogers (right).Credit: The Age

Asked about evidence from surviving guest Ian Wilkinson earlier in the trial that Patterson had been anxious about how to tell the children about her health issues – and asked for advice on whether she should tell them – Patterson said she remembered telling her guests that she didn’t want to tell the children.

Rogers: Did you ask the lunch guests for advice on whether or not to tell the kids about this threat to your life?

Patterson: No.

Rogers: Did you tell the lunch guests that you had cancer?

Patterson: I did not.

Rogers: Ian Wilkinson’s evidence is that you went on to talk about a diagnostic test. Did you mention [a diagnostic test]?

Patterson: I think I talked about that, I’d been undergoing some testing.

Rogers: Ian Wilkinson’s evidence is that [the testing] showed a spot on the scan that was a tumor.

Patterson: I remember him saying that in his evidence, but I don’t believe I said that [at the lunch].

Roger: Might you have said it?

Patterson: I don’t think so, no.

Rogers: I suggest to you that you told your lunch guests that you had received a cancer diagnosis. Do you agree or disagree?

Patterson: Disagree.

Rogers: I also suggest that you told them that it was not a suspected cancer.

Patterson: I’m very confused about that question.

Accused triple killer Erin Patterson has admitted to fabricating a serious illness, including hospital appointments, to her mother-in-law Gail Patterson – a deception she maintained because it made her feel “loved and cared for”.

Prosecutor Nanette Rogers is questioning Patterson about information she shared with Gail Patterson about a lump in her elbow and an appointment at St Vincent’s Hospital, which the mother of two admitted she had lied about.

Gail Patterson.

Rogers: You did not have a lump on your elbow on June 28, 2023.

Patterson: That’s true.

Rogers: You did not have an appointment at St Vincent’s hospital.

Patterson: No, I didn’t.

Rogers: You did not have any medical reason …

Patterson: I didn’t have a legitimate medical reason, that’s true.

Rogers: There was nothing to communicate to your kids about your medical issues.

Patterson: No.

Rogers: I suggest that you told Gail Patterson that you had a lump in your elbow … to plant a seed of you having a serious health issue.

Patterson: I … don’t think that’s right, no.

Rogers: Why did you say it?

Patterson: So … I think I gave this in evidence a couple of days ago, but I had initially thought I had an issue with my elbow … had a lot of pain for a number of weeks. I thought I had a lump. I had told Don and Gail about what I was worried about. It started to resolve. I probably whinged a bit too much to Don and Gail about it, and I was a bit embarrassed by that. They made me feel loved and cared for in the way they were asking about my health, and I didn’t want that to stop, so I just kept going.

Rogers asked Patterson whether she was expecting Gail Patterson to pass information about a biopsy and MRI onto her son, Simon, in the expectation that he would not decline any future lunch invitations to Erin Patterson’s house.

“I would not expect her to tell him any of that,” Patterson said.

Rogers has directed Patterson’s attention to a series of messages between her and Gail discussing her health. Patterson agreed that she pretended she was ill with a potentially serious disease.