Erin Patterson mushroom murder trial LIVE updates: Murder accused to take the witness stand for a third straight day
Everything you need to know about the Erin Patterson mushroom murder trial so far
Erin 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 Patterson ate her serving from a smaller, differently-coloured plate than 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.
Victoria's health department said the death cap mushroom poisoning was 'isolated' to Patterson's deadly lunch.
Multiple witnesses, including Erin's estranged husband, Heather's husband and other family members, have given emotionally-charged evidence to the jury.
Medical staff have told the jury of the painful symptoms the dying lunch guests and Mr Wilkinson suffered.
An expert witness told the court that death cap mushrooms were detected in debris taken from a dehydrator Patterson had allegedly dumped at a local tip.
Telecommunications expert Dr Matthew Sorell also told the jury Patterson's phone was detected near areas at Outtrim and Loch, in the Gippsland region, where death cap mushrooms had been spotted.
Victoria Police Cybercrime Squad senior digital forensics officer Shamen Fox-Henry said he found evidence of a death cap mushroom on data from a computer seized from Patterson's Leongatha home on August 5, 2023.
Austin Hospital intensive care director Professor Stephen Warrillow told the jury he was at the Melbourne health facility in July 2023 when the poisoned lunch guests were transferred to his care.
Professor Warrillow said all patients were given intense treatment and Don received a liver transplant.
Ian Wilkinson sat in court and listened as details of how his wife died from death cap poisoning were aired in court.
The jury also heard the text exchanges between health department officer Sally Anne Atkinson and Patterson in the days after the deadly lunch as authorities rushed to get answers.
The jury was shown the police interview Patterson took part in shortly after her home was searched on August 5.
Detectives seized a manual for a Sunbeam hydrator but Patterson denied in her interview that she had ever owned such an appliance.
Patterson also told police she invited her in-laws for lunch because she loved them and they were like real family to her.
Homicide Squad detective leading Senior Constable Stephen Eppingstall told the court officers searched for a Samsung Galaxy A23 – known as 'Phone A' – but it was never found.
Sen-Constable Eppingstall also said another Samsung Galaxy A23 – known as 'Phone B' – was factory reset multiple times including while police searched Patterson's Leongatha home.
He said Phone B was later remotely wiped while it was kept in a secure locker at the Homicide Squad headquarters in Melbourne.
The jury also heard Patterson's family had a history of cancer and her daughter had a benign ovarian cancer cyst removed.
Lead defence barrister Colin Mandy SC suggested to Sen-Constable Eppingstall that a photo taken during the Leongatha police search depicted the mysterious Phone A.
Mr Mandy also highlighted other devices he suggested police failed to seize including laptops and a USB stick.
Later, the jury heard Facebook messages between Patterson and her online friends in which they discussed Simon, pets and the death of actress Kirstie Alley.
The jury also heard Signal messages between Don and Erin in which Don and Gail (pictured) wished Patterson well and also prayed for her health.
On Friday, the jury heard more messages between Erin, Don, Gail and Simon.
They discussed Patterson's health and Don also offered to help tutor Erin's son.
Erin also praised Gail in another message.
'Happy Mother's Day to the best mother-in-law anyone could ever ask for,' Erin wrote.
Late on Monday, the Crown led by Dr Nanette Rogers (pictured) closed it's case and Patterson herself entered the witness box.
A huge crowd of people (pictured) lined up outside court on Tuesday to listen to Patterson give evidence that she foraged for wild mushrooms and accept death cap mushrooms were in the lethal lunch meal.
The trial continues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
24 minutes ago
- The Independent
Jury finds Milwaukee man guilty of killing and dismembering 19-year-old woman
A jury found a Milwaukee man guilty Friday of killing and dismembering a 19-year-old college student on the night of their first date. Prosecutors charged Maxwell Anderson in April 2024 with first-degree intentional homicide, dismembering a corpse, arson and hiding a corpse in connection with Sade Robinson's death. The jury convicted Anderson on all four counts. Investigators believe Anderson killed her on their first date on April 1, 2024, dismembered her body and spread her remains around Milwaukee County. They also believe he burned her car to hide evidence. Anderson's attorney, Tony Cotton, argued during the eight-day trial that no DNA links Anderson to the crimes. Cotton did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment on Friday's verdicts. Anderson faces a mandatory life sentence in prison when he's sentenced Aug. 15.
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Confusion and chaos reign in Tasmanian parliament with no endgame in sight
Craig Garland, the fisherman turned maverick independent MP from Tasmania's north-western corner, summed it up best when he told state parliament on Thursday morning he was 'a bit confused'. Garland wasn't confused about what he was doing – he calmly backed a no-confidence motion in the Liberal premier, Jeremy Rockliff. But he expressed doubts about how the Tasmanian parliament got here, and what lay ahead. Based on the reaction online and on talkback radio, many Tasmanians agree. From the outside – and to many on the inside – the events in parliament this week look like a form of collective madness that was entirely avoidable and, despite all the strong words, largely pointless. The vote of no-confidence in Rockliff, moved by the Labor leader Dean Winter, passed on Thursday afternoon by the barest of margins: 18-17. It has pushed the state to the brink of a fresh election just 15 months since the last one. Bizarrely, the state finds itself in this position despite all the major players – Liberals, Labor and the Greens – declaring loudly that an election is a bad idea and should not happen. Each had the power to prevent one. Which is not to say all are equally to blame. We need to briefly rewind 15 months. On 23 March last year, Tasmanians chose what some have called a rainbow parliament, and others have described as chaos: 14 Liberals, 10 Labor, five Greens, three MPs from the Jacqui Lambie Network (JLN) and three independents. No party was close to the 18 seats needed for a majority government, but the Liberals had a clear plurality of support. Winter declined to try to lead the state despite the crossbench being made up largely of progressive MPs, declaring he would never deal with the Greens. Sign up for a weekly email featuring our best reads Rockliff won a promise of support on confidence and budget supply from JLN and the independent David O'Byrne, a former Labor leader, who would prefer an ALP government but wanted the parliament to work. In the months that followed JLN fell apart and the government's position became more precarious. The sole remaining JLN MP, Andrew Jenner, refused to vote for a budget released in September, breaking his commitment to ensure the government survived. The then treasurer and deputy premier, Michael Ferguson, was forced to resign and move to the backbench when he faced what would have been a successful no-confidence vote over mismanagement of new Spirit of Tasmania ferries. And the Greens moved two no-confidence motions in Rockliff – one over a shelved gambling harm minimisation promise, the other over a controversial AFL stadium planned for Macquarie Point, on Hobart's waterfront. Despite the noise, the premier appeared relatively safe. Just last month, Labor argued the state needed a period of stability. That changed on Tuesday, when Winter surprised observers by tabling a no-confidence motion at the end of a budget reply speech, and declaring he would move it when it was clear it had enough support. It was a dare to both the crossbench and the government. But it was a tactic without a clear endgame. The motion was ostensibly about the budget, arguing Rockliff had wrecked the state's finances, planned to sell public assets and had mismanaged the ferries. Handed down five days earlier, the budget had been widely criticised for increasing debt and spending, and failing to provide solutions to structural problems. Some government supporters said it was the worst they had seen. But the opposition leader did not make a case for what Labor would do differently, and did not make a pitch to become premier if the no-confidence motion carried. The goal was to either push the Greens to side with Rockliff to prevent chaos or, more likely, claim the premier's scalp by forcing the Liberals to replace him, almost certainly with someone less popular. Neither happened. The motion quickly won backing on Tuesday from Garland, Jenner, and the independent Kristie Johnston (who had backed earlier no-confidence motions). The Greens declared their support after meeting on Wednesday morning. But the Greens did not want the motion to just be about the budget. The minor party tried to amend it to include a rejection of the stadium – one of the biggest issues dominating public debate in the state over the past year given the likely $1bn-plus cost, and because admission of the Tasmania Devils to the AFL hinges on it being built. Their leader, Rosalie Woodruff, also offered to work with Labor to try to form an alternative government. Both steps were rejected. The Greens knew they would be. They backed the motion anyway. Some commentary over the past week assumed the motion would lead to a Labor-Greens minority government. But the relationship between the two parties in the state is hostile, and they are ideologically miles apart. Winter's defining position since becoming Labor leader last year has been to argue for 'traditional industries' – including native forest logging, salmon farming and mining – and to reject suggestions he would work with the minor party. Winter did not speak with crossbenchers before tabling the no-confidence motion, and Labor and the Greens mostly voted against Rockliff for different reasons. Sign up to Five Great Reads Each week our editors select five of the most interesting, entertaining and thoughtful reads published by Guardian Australia and our international colleagues. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Saturday morning after newsletter promotion There is deep history to this. Labor and the Greens fell out after governing in partnership from 2010 to 2014, a period in which two Greens held ministries. The relationship has become more distant under Winter, who is close to the former premier Paul Lennon, an assertively pro-industry and anti-green figure. It doesn't take much analysis to realise this raises questions about whether Labor can form government anytime soon, given it has lost four straight elections and has less than a third of seats in the state's lower house. It continues to argue it could win a majority. Labor and the Greens are also sharply divided over the stadium, which has become the most politically charged issue facing the state and driven significant public resentment against the government. Polls suggest a majority of the public are opposed to it in every electorate, especially in the state's parochial north. But the stadium has the support of both major parties – not least because neither wants to stand accused of killing the long-held dream of a Tasmanian AFL team, which still has overwhelming public support. There is a strong case that a new stadium will be needed in the state's capital for the club to be a success. But the state government spectacularly stuffed up the argument. It signed a lopsided deal under which the AFL pays a meagre $15m of the direct funding for the stadium's construction. Predictably, the cost of the stadium to taxpayers has blown out beyond Rockliff's initial pledge it would be capped at $375m. And the site itself is controversial. The premier has broken promises on the issue, most recently trying to push through legislation to circumvent the independent-heavy upper house from potentially blocking the stadium. Meanwhile, the AFL has refused to budge from its line – no stadium at Macquarie Point, no team. Critics including the Greens accuse the government of caving to AFL pressure, point to crises facing the state on housing and health, and argue a stadium cannot be justified. Some have claimed, without evidence, the AFL could be forced to redraw the deal. Some vocal critics don't care if there is a team. But that's not where most of the public is. It's a mess that continues to hurt the government, but doesn't necessarily win support for Labor. As the no-confidence motion was debated, Tasmania Devils executive Kath McCann broke down at a press conference as she argued the future of the club was uncertain if Rockliff was removed. While it wasn't the subject of the no-confidence motion, you could make a decent case that the stadium – including the AFL's refusal to accommodate genuinely held Tasmanian concerns – will cost Rockliff his job. But that hasn't happened yet, and it is not clear if it will. The Liberals have backed Rockliff, for now at least, rather than replace him with one of a list of potential contenders. Liberal MPs have argued the budget was backed by the government, not just Rockliff, and supported his push for an early election if the no-confidence motion was passed. They may yet change their minds. Business leaders warn an election would hurt confidence and stall investment. Some senior Liberal figures have urged the parliamentary party elect a new leader to avoid forcing Tasmanians vote again. The parliament has to return on Tuesday to pass a short-term supply bill before Rockliff plans to speak with the governor, Barbara Baker, so they have a few days to work it out. If there is an election, it is difficult to see either major party approaching a majority of seats. The most recent ERMS poll had Labor on 31% support, ahead of the Liberals, who fell five percentage points to just 29%. But 37% said they preferred someone else. This doesn't bode well for the major parties, which have struggled to come to grips with the reality of an expanded 35-member parliament in which no one has control. The Liberals failed to maintain the support of enough MPs. Labor has done little to develop a relationship with the crossbench. Tasmanians might soon tell them that's not good enough, and to try again.
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Should Sydney's light rail carriages be modified after second death in two years?
For the second time in two years, a pedestrian has died after being struck by a tram on Sydney's light rail. New South Wales police said they found a man under a tram carriage in Surry Hills on Thursday afternoon. Paramedics treated him at the scene, but he died. Police said initial inquiries showed the man was attempting to cross the light rail track between two carriages when the tram began moving and trapped him. In May 2023, a teenage girl died after attempting to cross a street in Sydney's CBD between two tram carriages. She became trapped underneath one of them when the tram started moving, suffering fatal injuries. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email That two similar deaths occurred just two years apart meant police, the premier, and transport bureaucrats fielded questions from the media this week over whether the light rail network, and the trams themselves, should be made safer. Dr Geoffrey Clinton, a senior lecturer in transport management at the University of Sydney, said it was 'probably wise' for the government to investigate additional safety measures to stop people from attempting to climb over them. Sydney's light rail network uses a few different tram models – what bureaucrats call 'rolling stock'. What they have in common is that they typically have separate carriages that are coupled together to form a longer vehicle, unlike trams in Melbourne, which have only one carriage. Many of the trams now have 'danger' signs on the joinery between the carriages, warning people not to try to climb over them. Clinton said the state government or the network's private operator, Transdev, could consider additional signage. 'Or even something like a net between the two carriages to discourage people from trying to clamber through,' he said. He posed the idea of running the trams twice as frequently with only one carriage, making them half as long, but said it didn't 'seem like a feasible solution'. '[That] would very expensive to do and wouldn't add to the capacity of the network, but it would double the labour cost,' he said. The transport minister, John Graham, declined to comment. A Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) spokesperson said the man's death was 'extremely distressing'. The NSW police inspector, Anderson Lessing, on Thursday said that after speaking to witnesses and reviewing CCTV, it appeared the man had stepped between the tram carriages off the platform at the light rail stop on Devonshire Street. 'There's obviously risk involved, but it comes back to personal responsibility when you do cross the tram line, and it's that balance that we have to get right,' he said. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The TfNSW coordinator-general, Howard Collins, expressed his condolences to the man's family and first responders. He said the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator (ONRSR) would work with Transdev to establish whether any safety recommendations could be made or whether the death was 'a case of really unfortunate misadventure'. The ONRSR also reviewed the 2023 light rail death. On Friday, there was some confusion between the government and Transdev over whether the operator had received a report from the regulator. ONRSR later confirmed its investigation reports were not released to operators. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau and NSW Office of Transport Safety Investigations said they had not reviewed the 2023 death and would not to review Thursday's one either. '[We] have reviewed the initial available information and determined that, as in the 2023 occurrence … it is unlikely an independent transport safety investigation would identify any new or unknown transport safety factor that could prevent an incident of this nature from occurring in the future,' a spokesperson said. The premier, Chris Minns, said he was sorry for the man and his family, but he wouldn't be drawn on whether the government was considering any safety upgrades. 'The safety regulator's in place,' he said. 'It's obviously the case that whenever there's a terrible event like this, a terrible incident, they conduct an investigation.' Terry Lee-Williams, a transport planning strategist, said it was 'awful that somebody died', but overall, Sydney's light rail network was safe and 'actually quite a low speed system'. One suggestion for improving safety could be replacing the trams with the concertina-like ones used in Melbourne, he said, but this would be costly. He said Sydney's trams were a 'standard design' and similar to those operated in many European countries. 'You don't see much of the Melbourne-style trams around the world because they're less accessible,' he said. 'Sydney has very narrow, windy streets.'
