Erin Patterson's next steps as the death cap killer faces a long prison stint
Patterson will be sentenced by Supreme Court Justice Christopher Beale before her lawyers get the chance to appeal the decision.
Associate Professor Andrew Hemming, a criminal law expert at the University of Southern Queensland, said the 50-year-old will likely be an elderly woman by the time she's released from prison.
"Murder is a level one imprisonment offence, so potentially life imprisonment. But the standard period [for one murder conviction] is 25 years," he said.
Patterson was found guilty of three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder at Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court on July 7 in the trial's eleventh week.
READ MORE: Reaction to the mushroom killer's verdict and behind the Erin Patterson story
The jury heard from more than 50 witnesses connected to Patterson and a fatal lunch she cooked in July 2023 at her Leongatha home that claimed the lives of Heather Wilkinson, Gail and Don Patterson.
Heather's husband, Ian Wilkinson, survived the beef Wellington laced with death cap mushrooms after undergoing a successful liver transplant.
The length of Patterson's time in prison will be determined by Justice Christopher Beale in a sentencing hearing.
The prosecution and the defence will make suggestions as to the appropriate level of sentence, Associate Professor Hemming said.
"Section three of the Victorian Crimes Act spells out the punishment for murder. The standard period is 25 years," he said.
"We're not talking about a standard sentence here because three people have been murdered, and there was one attempted murder."
A murderer may be sentenced to 30 years in prison if the victim was a custodial officer or an emergency worker on duty.
Associate Professor Hemming said that multiple murder cases were "normally treated in the same vein" as killing an emergency worker on duty, attracting a longer sentence.
If Patterson decides to contest her verdict or sentence, she may take her case to the Court of Appeal.
The court has a panel of three judges, who would assess whether Patterson's trial was "a substantial miscarriage of justice".
"This is a high bar," Associate Professor Hemming said.
"They've got to show that the verdict is unsafe and unsound and should be quashed," he said.
"That's no easy task, given the centrality of the jury in our criminal justice system."
If Patterson has a failed bid at the Court of Appeals, she could seek leave to go to the High Court of Australia, Associate Professor Hemming said.
"Now, to give an indication of how hard that is, only about seven per cent of leave applications to the High Court are taken," he said.
If all appeals have failed, and Patterson still feels that justice was denied, she may make an application to the Attorney General for judicial review.
But to get a judicial review, her lawyers must be able to present "fresh and compelling" evidence that was not available during her trial.
It's "the last gasp," the criminal law expert said.
The jury in Erin Patterson's triple-murder trial found her guilty, but the mushroom killer's entanglement with the court system is not yet over.
Patterson will be sentenced by Supreme Court Justice Christopher Beale before her lawyers get the chance to appeal the decision.
Associate Professor Andrew Hemming, a criminal law expert at the University of Southern Queensland, said the 50-year-old will likely be an elderly woman by the time she's released from prison.
"Murder is a level one imprisonment offence, so potentially life imprisonment. But the standard period [for one murder conviction] is 25 years," he said.
Patterson was found guilty of three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder at Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court on July 7 in the trial's eleventh week.
READ MORE: Reaction to the mushroom killer's verdict and behind the Erin Patterson story
The jury heard from more than 50 witnesses connected to Patterson and a fatal lunch she cooked in July 2023 at her Leongatha home that claimed the lives of Heather Wilkinson, Gail and Don Patterson.
Heather's husband, Ian Wilkinson, survived the beef Wellington laced with death cap mushrooms after undergoing a successful liver transplant.
The length of Patterson's time in prison will be determined by Justice Christopher Beale in a sentencing hearing.
The prosecution and the defence will make suggestions as to the appropriate level of sentence, Associate Professor Hemming said.
"Section three of the Victorian Crimes Act spells out the punishment for murder. The standard period is 25 years," he said.
"We're not talking about a standard sentence here because three people have been murdered, and there was one attempted murder."
A murderer may be sentenced to 30 years in prison if the victim was a custodial officer or an emergency worker on duty.
Associate Professor Hemming said that multiple murder cases were "normally treated in the same vein" as killing an emergency worker on duty, attracting a longer sentence.
If Patterson decides to contest her verdict or sentence, she may take her case to the Court of Appeal.
The court has a panel of three judges, who would assess whether Patterson's trial was "a substantial miscarriage of justice".
"This is a high bar," Associate Professor Hemming said.
"They've got to show that the verdict is unsafe and unsound and should be quashed," he said.
"That's no easy task, given the centrality of the jury in our criminal justice system."
If Patterson has a failed bid at the Court of Appeals, she could seek leave to go to the High Court of Australia, Associate Professor Hemming said.
"Now, to give an indication of how hard that is, only about seven per cent of leave applications to the High Court are taken," he said.
If all appeals have failed, and Patterson still feels that justice was denied, she may make an application to the Attorney General for judicial review.
But to get a judicial review, her lawyers must be able to present "fresh and compelling" evidence that was not available during her trial.
It's "the last gasp," the criminal law expert said.
The jury in Erin Patterson's triple-murder trial found her guilty, but the mushroom killer's entanglement with the court system is not yet over.
Patterson will be sentenced by Supreme Court Justice Christopher Beale before her lawyers get the chance to appeal the decision.
Associate Professor Andrew Hemming, a criminal law expert at the University of Southern Queensland, said the 50-year-old will likely be an elderly woman by the time she's released from prison.
"Murder is a level one imprisonment offence, so potentially life imprisonment. But the standard period [for one murder conviction] is 25 years," he said.
Patterson was found guilty of three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder at Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court on July 7 in the trial's eleventh week.
READ MORE: Reaction to the mushroom killer's verdict and behind the Erin Patterson story
The jury heard from more than 50 witnesses connected to Patterson and a fatal lunch she cooked in July 2023 at her Leongatha home that claimed the lives of Heather Wilkinson, Gail and Don Patterson.
Heather's husband, Ian Wilkinson, survived the beef Wellington laced with death cap mushrooms after undergoing a successful liver transplant.
The length of Patterson's time in prison will be determined by Justice Christopher Beale in a sentencing hearing.
The prosecution and the defence will make suggestions as to the appropriate level of sentence, Associate Professor Hemming said.
"Section three of the Victorian Crimes Act spells out the punishment for murder. The standard period is 25 years," he said.
"We're not talking about a standard sentence here because three people have been murdered, and there was one attempted murder."
A murderer may be sentenced to 30 years in prison if the victim was a custodial officer or an emergency worker on duty.
Associate Professor Hemming said that multiple murder cases were "normally treated in the same vein" as killing an emergency worker on duty, attracting a longer sentence.
If Patterson decides to contest her verdict or sentence, she may take her case to the Court of Appeal.
The court has a panel of three judges, who would assess whether Patterson's trial was "a substantial miscarriage of justice".
"This is a high bar," Associate Professor Hemming said.
"They've got to show that the verdict is unsafe and unsound and should be quashed," he said.
"That's no easy task, given the centrality of the jury in our criminal justice system."
If Patterson has a failed bid at the Court of Appeals, she could seek leave to go to the High Court of Australia, Associate Professor Hemming said.
"Now, to give an indication of how hard that is, only about seven per cent of leave applications to the High Court are taken," he said.
If all appeals have failed, and Patterson still feels that justice was denied, she may make an application to the Attorney General for judicial review.
But to get a judicial review, her lawyers must be able to present "fresh and compelling" evidence that was not available during her trial.
It's "the last gasp," the criminal law expert said.
The jury in Erin Patterson's triple-murder trial found her guilty, but the mushroom killer's entanglement with the court system is not yet over.
Patterson will be sentenced by Supreme Court Justice Christopher Beale before her lawyers get the chance to appeal the decision.
Associate Professor Andrew Hemming, a criminal law expert at the University of Southern Queensland, said the 50-year-old will likely be an elderly woman by the time she's released from prison.
"Murder is a level one imprisonment offence, so potentially life imprisonment. But the standard period [for one murder conviction] is 25 years," he said.
Patterson was found guilty of three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder at Latrobe Valley Magistrates' Court on July 7 in the trial's eleventh week.
READ MORE: Reaction to the mushroom killer's verdict and behind the Erin Patterson story
The jury heard from more than 50 witnesses connected to Patterson and a fatal lunch she cooked in July 2023 at her Leongatha home that claimed the lives of Heather Wilkinson, Gail and Don Patterson.
Heather's husband, Ian Wilkinson, survived the beef Wellington laced with death cap mushrooms after undergoing a successful liver transplant.
The length of Patterson's time in prison will be determined by Justice Christopher Beale in a sentencing hearing.
The prosecution and the defence will make suggestions as to the appropriate level of sentence, Associate Professor Hemming said.
"Section three of the Victorian Crimes Act spells out the punishment for murder. The standard period is 25 years," he said.
"We're not talking about a standard sentence here because three people have been murdered, and there was one attempted murder."
A murderer may be sentenced to 30 years in prison if the victim was a custodial officer or an emergency worker on duty.
Associate Professor Hemming said that multiple murder cases were "normally treated in the same vein" as killing an emergency worker on duty, attracting a longer sentence.
If Patterson decides to contest her verdict or sentence, she may take her case to the Court of Appeal.
The court has a panel of three judges, who would assess whether Patterson's trial was "a substantial miscarriage of justice".
"This is a high bar," Associate Professor Hemming said.
"They've got to show that the verdict is unsafe and unsound and should be quashed," he said.
"That's no easy task, given the centrality of the jury in our criminal justice system."
If Patterson has a failed bid at the Court of Appeals, she could seek leave to go to the High Court of Australia, Associate Professor Hemming said.
"Now, to give an indication of how hard that is, only about seven per cent of leave applications to the High Court are taken," he said.
If all appeals have failed, and Patterson still feels that justice was denied, she may make an application to the Attorney General for judicial review.
But to get a judicial review, her lawyers must be able to present "fresh and compelling" evidence that was not available during her trial.
It's "the last gasp," the criminal law expert said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
8 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Helicopter pilot Sebastian Robinson denies being 'raging cocaine junky' during trial of Outback Wrangler Matt Wright
Pilot Sebastian Robinson has admitted to occasional drug use but denied he is a 'raging cocaine junky' during the Supreme Court trial of crocodile wrangler Matt Wright. Wright has pleaded not guilty to three charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice over his alleged actions following the chopper crash that killed his friend and Netflix co-star Chris 'Willow' Wilson in February 2022. Mr Robinson was flying the helicopter on the day of the crash and suffered life-altering injuries, including a permanent brain injury and a severed spinal cord that has left him a paraplegic. The court had earlier heard allegations Mr Robinson was a 'party animal' and 'frequent user of cocaine'. But when questioned by crown prosecutor Jason Gullaci SC, Mr Robinson said he had only used cocaine about 10 times in the five years before the fatal crash. 'Were you a raging cocaine junky Mr Robinson?' Mr Gullaci asked. Mr Robinson replied: 'Not at all.' He told the court that during seven years as a pilot he had never used cocaine within hours of flying or flown a helicopter while intoxicated. Mr Robinson said he was aware cocaine metabolites had been found in his system after the crash. He was also asked about police seizing his phone and downloading its contents. 'Would there be messages on that phone that would confirm your use of cocaine in the five years before the crash?' Mr Gullaci asked. Mr Robinson replied: 'I would think so, yes.' Mr Robinson was also asked about his usual practice when it came to the fuel management of helicopters. He told the court the Robinson R44 helicopters, like the one he was flying on the day of the crash, had a warning light that came on when there was 18 litres of fuel left in the tank. 'The R44 has got a low fuel system in it so with approximately 18 litres left a light in the console will illuminate very brightly and that will mean you've got approximately 18 litres, which is 18 minutes, of fuel left," he said. He said he had never seen the fuel light come on while flying. If it did come on he said he would land the helicopter straight away. Mr Robinson has been asked questions about the day of the fatal helicopter crash, but has told the court his memory is fuzzy and he only recalls glimpses of certain events. He was shown a photograph taken in the helicopter by Mr Wilson on the morning of the crash showing the helicopter's main and auxiliary tanks were each at least three quarters full. Mr Robinson agreed with Mr Gullaci that the helicopter would have had enough fuel to reach the crash site. The trial before Justice Alan Blow continues.
ABC News
9 hours ago
- ABC News
Child sex abuse survivor calls for urgent case management reform after his life was 'shattered'
A child sex abuse survivor has called on the courts and police across Australia to urgently reform the way cases like his are managed. South Australian Mike Worsman has delivered a victim impact statement in the ACT Supreme Court today describing the crimes against him as "monstrous". The man accused of the offences has pleaded guilty to five charges, including acts of indecency and rape, committed in Canberra in the 1990s. Mr Worsman was only 12 at the time of the offences. The court heard the man had threatened to kill him if he told anyone, as the attacks became increasingly violent. "He stopped only when I said, 'Kill me or stop'," Mr Worsman told the court. In a graphic account he said: "I will never be un-raped". "I will never know a life free from this pain," Mr Worsman said. "He shattered my existence. "His evil infected me." Mr Worsman had kept the abuse secret for more than 20 years. But then came a bombshell, when he discovered his abuser had sexually assaulted another child. The man spent several years in jail in South Australia for that offence, but has recently been released. Mr Worsman said the discovery another person had suffered at the hands of his abuser prompted him to go to police in 2019. But after gathering his courage — and taking part in a five hour interview — he was told by the officer involved he was in the wrong place. "He said, 'Oh, actually I shouldn't have been taking your statement here — the crimes first started in the ACT', and he then went on to say, 'Actually I'll send them the document next week'," Mr Worsman said in an interview after his court appearance. "Eighteen months later is how long it took him, me following up every month to say, 'Hey, have you sent that document that's about me being raped as a child over to the ACT?'" There was then a long wait while his abuser served the first sentence. But when it came to bringing the man to Canberra, there was another hurdle, with no legal avenue to extradite him. "He pleaded guilty on the 19th of June last year," Mr Worsman said. "Why couldn't he be sentenced a month after that via remote video link? "He was sentenced via remote video link for the other case." He said it had been an anxious wait between the man being released from South Australia, and the ACT court proceedings. "He was then allowed to be a free citizen and asked to get on a plane by [SA Police], thankfully he did, and then he's out in the community here," Mr Worsman said. He has also called for tough minimum sentences for such offenders, to protect the community. The offender will be sentenced on Thursday.
ABC News
9 hours ago
- ABC News
Jury told they must remain unbiased in trial against former Hobart teacher Keith Bates-Willie
The defence lawyer for a 71-year-old former Hobart teacher and theatre director accused of indecently touching students has told a Supreme Court jury to keep an open mind about his client and remember the accused is a "real person" who has denied any wrongdoing. WARNING: This story includes descriptions of alleged child sexual abuse, which some readers may find distressing. The trial for Keith Athol Bates-Willie is continuing in the Supreme Court in Hobart. Mr Bates has pleaded not guilty to 14 criminal charges, including rape, indecent assault and the persistent sexual abuse of a child. The charges relate to incidents at three separate Hobart schools between the late 1970s and the early 2000s. Mr Bates' lawyer, Jessie Sawyer, reminded the jury in her closing submissions on Tuesday that in making their decision of finding Mr Bates guilty or not guilty, they must remain unbiased. "The state [prosecution] invited you to feel sorry for these witnesses. They said no one listened to them when they tried to complain. "Regardless of how you feel about any of them, you need to push that to the side. "Mr Bates is also a person and he said he did not commit these crimes." Crown prosecutor Jack Shapiro told the jury on Monday, the volume of evidence in the case was "overwhelming". He urged the jury to consider all of the evidence. Mr Shapiro alleged Mr Bates put students in skimpy clothing during theatre performances, touched them in dressing rooms and would often grab their genitals. It is also the crown's case that Mr Bates invited students over to his house for dinner parties, gave them alcohol and asked them to sleep over, where he would indecently touch them. "There's an overwhelming volume of evidence to prove the accused touched many male students indecently," Mr Shapiro told the court. "There were 16 different men who came into this court and told you they were touched indecently. It's just an overwhelming number … these witnesses are real people. "Why would they come into open court and tell you what happened unless it did happen … 16 different men telling you in graphic detail, and becoming upset about being touched." "Mr Bates had a tendency to touch male students, to groom them … to establish a close relationship," Mr Shapiro told the court. To this allegation, Ms Sawyer reminded the jury her client has denied any wrongdoing and argued a lot of the evidence heard "couldn't have happened". "The state has painted Mr Bates as a villain … and says he has a tendency to touch students. This is just denied," she said. "You can't just apply today's standards to something that happened 40 years ago. The trial, before Justice Stephen Estcourt, continues.
