Judge in Erin Patterson murder trial tells jury they must find her not guilty if they believe her evidence
By
Mikaela Ortolan
and
Kate Higgins
, ABC
Erin Patterson has spent the day in the witness chair in her trial in Morwell.
Photo:
ABC News: Anita Lester
The judge in Erin Patterson's triple-murder trial has told the jury that if they believe the evidence given by the accused at trial, they must find her not guilty.
Justice Christopher Beale on Tuesday began his final instructions to the Supreme Court jury.
The trial, which is being heard in the regional Victorian town of Morwell, is in its ninth week.
Patterson is accused of murdering her parents-in-law, Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson, and attempting to murder Heather's husband Ian, by serving them a beef Wellington containing death cap mushrooms during a meal at her home in Leongatha in 2023.
She has pleaded not guilty.
How Erin Patterson is related to her lunch guests.
Photo:
ABC News
Beginning his instructions, Justice Beale said the jury must limit its deliberations to evidence presented before the court, which he said were testimony, exhibits, and agreed facts.
He said comments made by himself or counsel were not evidence, and that only the jury could decide whether Patterson was guilty or not guilty.
"You are the only ones in this court who can make a decision about these facts," he said.
Patterson was the trial's final witness and gave evidence for a marathon eight days.
On Tuesday, Justice Beale said the jury must assess Patterson's evidence in the same way as they would the evidence of all other witnesses.
"In choosing to give evidence, she undertook to tell the truth," he said.
Justice Beale said if the jury found her evidence to be true, they must find her not guilty.
He said if they thought it might be true, there was reasonable doubt.
If they did not believe her, Justice Beale said the jury had to put her testimony aside and decide if the prosecution had proven the rest of its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Justice Beale previously told the court his instructions would take at least two days.
On Tuesday, the judge revisited several moments in the trial, highlighting "inconsistencies" in evidence given by some witnesses.
Justice Beale said in his evidence, lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson told the jury Patterson had said she had cancer, but in later cross-examination it was brought to the jury's attention that he had told police she had suspected cancer.
He also pointed to evidence given by Erin Patterson's sister-in-law, Tanya Patterson, about when Erin's relationship with her husband, Simon, had deteriorated.
During the trial, Tanya Patterson described Erin and Simon's relationship as "quite good" for many years, but that their relationship started to deteriorate before the fateful lunch.
In cross-examination, she was questioned over the dates of when she noticed that deterioration, which the court heard was different from the timeline she gave in preliminary hearings.
Justice Beale also highlighted inconsistencies in evidence that had been heard about certain topics or events. Those included whether Erin Patterson tended to pick and eat wild mushrooms, how much of the beef Wellington Erin and Gail Patterson had eaten, and when Erin Patterson became ill.
Justice Beale noted that the jury may identify what they believed were other inconsistencies in evidence given by other prosecution witnesses or the accused, and that that was a matter for them.
At the outset of Tuesday's hearing, Justice Beale said he would deliver his instructions in three parts - the principles of the law, the issues jurors would need to decide, and the procedure to be followed when they did decide on their verdicts.
He told the jury that just because he did not mention some evidence or arguments by counsel, it did not mean the evidence was not important.
Similarly, he said his references to particular pieces of evidence or arguments did not mean they were more important than others.
"You must consider all of the evidence, not just the parts of it that I have mentioned," Justice Beale said.
"The same goes for the arguments of counsel."
Justice Beale also said the jury should not be prejudiced against the accused by the fact that Ms Patterson had admitted to lying or disposing of evidence.
"This is a court of law, not a court of morals," he said.
He further warned the panel to steer clear of outside influences.
"This case has attracted unprecedented media attention," he said.
"If any of that has reached your eyes or ears or does so in the coming days, you must be particularly careful not to let it influence you in any way.
"No one in the media, in public, in your workplace or in your homes have sat in that jury box throughout [this trial] … you and you alone are best placed to decide whether the prosecution has proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt."
-
ABC
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
9 hours ago
- RNZ News
Police announce $500k reward in bid to locate British backpacker Peter Falconio's body
By Jack Hislop for ABC News Peter Falconio was shot in the head in July 2001, but his body has never been found. Photo: Supplied Australian police have announced a new $500,000 reward for information that leads to the discovery of Peter Falconio's remains. Falconio was shot in the head on a remote stretch of the Stuart Highway near Barrow Creek - about 300 kilometres north of Alice Springs - in July 2001. The 28-year-old British backpacker was at the time travelling around Australia with his girlfriend Joanne Lees. Bradley John Murdoch was convicted of murdering Mr Falconio in 2005, but has never revealed the location of his body. Several extensive police searches have failed to locate his remains. Murdoch was also convicted of the attempted kidnap and assault of Lees, who managed to escape and hide in bushland. He is currently serving a life sentence at Alice Springs prison, with a non-parole period of 28 years. Bradley John Murdoch in 2003. Photo: AFP / DAVID HANCOCK Acting Commander Mark Grieve said NT police still "hold out hope" that someone could provide information that leads to the discovery of Falconio's body. "As such a fresh reward for information is now on offer of up to $500,000," he said. "We are asking for anyone that may believe they have information that can assist, to please come forward and contact police. "We recognise the passage of time that's transpired, however it's never too late to reach out and start that conversation with police. "You just never know how beneficial that information that you may hold, may be - essentially you just don't know what you know." Murdoch was due to be eligible for parole in 2032, at 74 years old. But under the NT government's "no body, no parole" laws, introduced in 2016, Murdoch may not be granted parole if he continues to not cooperate with authorities in locating Falconio's body. Murdoch was diagnosed with terminal throat cancer in 2019. The ABC understands he is currently in palliative care in Alice Springs Hospital. Acting Commander Grieve said police had made "numerous approaches" to Murdoch over the years, including this week, for information on the whereabouts of Falconio's body. "Unfortunately, the outcome of those conversations rests with Murdoch," he said. "On all occasions he has chosen not to positively engage with police. "There may be someone out there that he's confided in - whether that's family and friends - we just don't know. "It's a good opportunity for us to up the ante in regards to the reward. "We think there's still people out there that may hold some information." Asked what had prompted an increase to the reward, Acting Commander Grieve said police believed now was the "right time". "[Police] recognise that there's certain times where there's the potential for opportunities to be taken advantage of," he said. "There was a previous reward of up to $250,000, so we've upped that to up to $500,000. "It's like any ongoing police investigation, you want to solve it. "You want to try and at least bring some sliver of resolution to Peter's family, by bringing home his remains." Acting Commander Grieve said NT police had spoken to Falconio's family within the past 24 hours. "We keep them appraised of what we're doing… any new information and leads. They're appreciative of the ongoing commitment we're providing," he said. Police have previously renewed calls for information on the 15th and 20th anniversaries of Falconio's death. - ABC
RNZ News
13 hours ago
- RNZ News
Australia prepares for verdict in mushroom murder trial
By Alasdair Pal for Reuters A court sketch of Erin Patterson during the trial. Photo: ABC News: Anita Lester The trial of an Australian woman accused of murdering three of her estranged husband's elderly relatives using toxic mushrooms has entered its final stages, with the jury soon to begin its deliberations in a case that has gripped the nation. Erin Patterson, 50, is charged with the murders of her mother-in-law Gail Patterson, father-in-law Donald Patterson and Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson - along with the attempted murder of Ian Wilkinson - Heather's husband, in July 2023. The prosecution accuses her of foraging for poisonous death cap mushrooms and knowingly adding them to individual portions of Beef Wellington that she served to her guests at her home in Leongatha, a town of about 6000 people some 135 km southeast of Melbourne. Patterson denies the charges, which carry a life sentence, with her defence calling the deaths a "terrible accident". Justice Christopher Beale, the presiding judge, began his second day of instructions to the jury on Wednesday at the Latrobe Valley Magistrates Court in Morwell, a former coal mining town whose best known tourist attractions until the trial were a rose garden and a regional art gallery. Beale has said the process will take until at least the end of the day, meaning the 14-member jury will retire to consider their verdict on Thursday at the earliest. Their decision must be unanimous. Outside, despite the winter cold and rain, members of the public began queuing for the limited seats in the court hours before proceedings began. "I am a true crime fanatic," said Philip Mayers, a social worker who got up at 5am and drove two hours from Melbourne, the state capital, to get his place in the court. "It's the uniqueness of it, you don't hear it every day." Members of the media gather outside the Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court for the trial of triple-murder suspect Erin Patterson in Morwell. Photo: AFP / MARTIN KEEP The trial has caused a sensation in Morwell, where Patterson requested to be tried rather than Melbourne. Laura Heller, the owner of Jay Dee's Cafe across the road from the modest two-storey court building, said business had tripled since the trial began on 29 April. "Even though it's not great circumstances, it has been very good for our community because it's brought people from outside the area," she said. Journalists, podcasters and documentary crews from domestic and international media have descended on the town for the proceedings, which British magazine The Spectator dubbed "Australia's trial of the century". Public broadcaster ABC's daily podcast on the trial is currently the most popular in Australia, while streaming platform Stan says it will soon be airing a documentary on the trial and "media frenzy" surrounding the case. The Cedar Lodge Motel next to the court is fully booked, unusual outside the peak summer season, duty manager John Nicoll said. "It has been a bit of a boom for the motel and for the area in general," he said. - Reuters
RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
Judge in Erin Patterson murder trial tells jury they must find her not guilty if they believe her evidence
By Mikaela Ortolan and Kate Higgins , ABC Erin Patterson has spent the day in the witness chair in her trial in Morwell. Photo: ABC News: Anita Lester The judge in Erin Patterson's triple-murder trial has told the jury that if they believe the evidence given by the accused at trial, they must find her not guilty. Justice Christopher Beale on Tuesday began his final instructions to the Supreme Court jury. The trial, which is being heard in the regional Victorian town of Morwell, is in its ninth week. Patterson is accused of murdering her parents-in-law, Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson, and attempting to murder Heather's husband Ian, by serving them a beef Wellington containing death cap mushrooms during a meal at her home in Leongatha in 2023. She has pleaded not guilty. How Erin Patterson is related to her lunch guests. Photo: ABC News Beginning his instructions, Justice Beale said the jury must limit its deliberations to evidence presented before the court, which he said were testimony, exhibits, and agreed facts. He said comments made by himself or counsel were not evidence, and that only the jury could decide whether Patterson was guilty or not guilty. "You are the only ones in this court who can make a decision about these facts," he said. Patterson was the trial's final witness and gave evidence for a marathon eight days. On Tuesday, Justice Beale said the jury must assess Patterson's evidence in the same way as they would the evidence of all other witnesses. "In choosing to give evidence, she undertook to tell the truth," he said. Justice Beale said if the jury found her evidence to be true, they must find her not guilty. He said if they thought it might be true, there was reasonable doubt. If they did not believe her, Justice Beale said the jury had to put her testimony aside and decide if the prosecution had proven the rest of its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Justice Beale previously told the court his instructions would take at least two days. On Tuesday, the judge revisited several moments in the trial, highlighting "inconsistencies" in evidence given by some witnesses. Justice Beale said in his evidence, lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson told the jury Patterson had said she had cancer, but in later cross-examination it was brought to the jury's attention that he had told police she had suspected cancer. He also pointed to evidence given by Erin Patterson's sister-in-law, Tanya Patterson, about when Erin's relationship with her husband, Simon, had deteriorated. During the trial, Tanya Patterson described Erin and Simon's relationship as "quite good" for many years, but that their relationship started to deteriorate before the fateful lunch. In cross-examination, she was questioned over the dates of when she noticed that deterioration, which the court heard was different from the timeline she gave in preliminary hearings. Justice Beale also highlighted inconsistencies in evidence that had been heard about certain topics or events. Those included whether Erin Patterson tended to pick and eat wild mushrooms, how much of the beef Wellington Erin and Gail Patterson had eaten, and when Erin Patterson became ill. Justice Beale noted that the jury may identify what they believed were other inconsistencies in evidence given by other prosecution witnesses or the accused, and that that was a matter for them. At the outset of Tuesday's hearing, Justice Beale said he would deliver his instructions in three parts - the principles of the law, the issues jurors would need to decide, and the procedure to be followed when they did decide on their verdicts. He told the jury that just because he did not mention some evidence or arguments by counsel, it did not mean the evidence was not important. Similarly, he said his references to particular pieces of evidence or arguments did not mean they were more important than others. "You must consider all of the evidence, not just the parts of it that I have mentioned," Justice Beale said. "The same goes for the arguments of counsel." Justice Beale also said the jury should not be prejudiced against the accused by the fact that Ms Patterson had admitted to lying or disposing of evidence. "This is a court of law, not a court of morals," he said. He further warned the panel to steer clear of outside influences. "This case has attracted unprecedented media attention," he said. "If any of that has reached your eyes or ears or does so in the coming days, you must be particularly careful not to let it influence you in any way. "No one in the media, in public, in your workplace or in your homes have sat in that jury box throughout [this trial] … you and you alone are best placed to decide whether the prosecution has proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt." - ABC
