Erin Patterson trial: Judge delivers warning to jurors in mushroom murder trial about websites
Jurors in Erin Patterson's triple-murder trial were delivered a firm warning on Wednesday afternoon after a question and answer exchange between the prosecution and a digital forensics officer.
Ms Patterson has pleaded not guilty to three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder stemming from an deadly beef Wellington lunch she hosted on July 29, 2023, with members of her husband's family.
On Wednesday, Victoria Police senor digital forensic officer Shamen Fox-Henry was the sole witness called to give evidence and is expected to return to the stand when the trial resumes at 11.30am on Thursday.
Mr Fox-Henry told the court he was tasked with generating a report about the contents of a Cooler Master computer seized from Ms Patterson's home following the lunch.
He took the jury through a series of records that captured online activity on the device in the evening of March 28, 2022.
One of the records captured a visit to a specific page on the citizen science website iNaturalist at 7.23pm.
'Deathcap from Melbourne, Vic, Australia on May 18 2022 … Bricker Reserve, Moorabbin - iNaturalist,' the headline for the page read.
Mr Fox-Henry was quizzed by prosecutor Jane Warren about the specific URL listed and, if it remained available online, if one copied the URL into a browser the web page would load.
He confirmed that it would.
The exchange prompted a warning from Justice Christoper Beale that the jury should not test this out themselves.
'Don't be tempted to put these URL searches into Google and conduct your own investigations overnight,' he said.
The warning echos Justice Beale's direction to jurors at the start of the trial that the must decide the case only on the evidence adduced in court.
'When you retire to consider your verdict, you will have heard or received in court all the information that you need to make your decision,' he said.
'You must not conduct your own research into the case or discuss the case with others who are not on the jury.'
Ms Patterson is facing trial accused of murdering her husband Simon Patterson's parents, Don and Gail Patterson, and his aunt Heather Wilkinson.
Ms Wilkinson's husband, Korumburra Baptist Church pastor Ian Wilkinson, fell gravely ill but recovered.
Prosecutors allege Ms Patterson deliberately spiked the lunch with 'murderous intent', while her defence argues the case is a 'tragic accident'.
The trial continues.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Herald Sun
7 hours ago
- Herald Sun
Erin Patterson mushroom murder trial: Erin Patterson two faces claim
Mushroom cook Erin Patterson had 'two faces' and was pretending to love her in-laws before she allegedly murdered them with a deadly beef wellington meal, a prosecutor has claimed. The mother of two has spent every day this week testifying in her own triple-murder trial and on Friday faced another grilling by Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC. Ms Patterson is standing trial in Morwell, accused of murdering her estranged husband's parents Don and Gail Patterson, both 70, along with Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson, 66. The prosecution alleges she served them individual beef wellingtons she had deliberately laced with lethal death cap mushrooms at her Leongatha home on July 29, 2023. Heather's husband, pastor Ian Wilkinson, 71, was the only guest to survive. Ms Patterson, 50, has pleaded not guilty to three counts of murder and one of attempted murder, claiming she may have accidentally added foraged mushrooms into the meal along with dried mushrooms she purchased from an Asian grocer. Under cross-examination, Dr Rogers suggested Ms Patterson did not love Don and Gail, pointing to expletive-laden messages to her Facebook friends where she described them as a 'lost cause' and 'wanted nothing to do with them'. Dr Rogers asked: 'In fact, you had two faces: a public face of appearing to have a good relationship with Don and Gail … agree or disagree?' Ms Patterson replied: 'Are you asking me to agree if I had two faces?' When pressed again, she said: 'I had a good relationship with Don and Gail.' Dr Rogers asked: 'I suggest that your private face was the one you showed in your Facebook Messenger use, correct or incorrect?' She replied: 'Incorrect.' Ms Patterson also disagreed that she was angry they took their son Simon's side amid a child support dispute in December 2022. 'They did love me and I did love them. I do love them,' she told the Supreme Court. Dr Rogers put to Ms Patterson that if she 'had loved them' she would have immediately notified the authorities when she realised on August 1 there was 'possibility' foraged mushrooms were in a container with the dried mushrooms from the Asian grocer. 'Well I didn't … I had been told that people were getting treatment for possible death cap mushroom poisoning, so that was already happening,' she said. She confirmed she 'did not tell anybody' about that possibility. The court heard Ms Patterson invited the guests and Simon to lunch after a church service on July 16, with Simon testifying that she said to him she had some 'important medical news' to share and had invited everyone 'to discuss that topic'. 'No, that's not what I said to him,' Ms Patterson replied. 'That wasn't the purpose of the lunch or the purpose of the invitations.' Dr Rogers took her to the text she sent Simon after he pulled out of the lunch on July 28. 'That's really disappointing. I've spent many hours this week preparing lunch for tomorrow which has been exhausting in light of the issues I'm facing … I may not be able to host a lunch like this again for some time,' she wrote. After a series of rapid-fire questions, Ms Patterson said she did tell Simon she wanted to discuss some 'medical stuff', but she denied that she wanted advice and that it was the purpose of the lunch. The jury has previously heard she misled her guests when she told them she may need treatment for cancer, but she testified on Friday she was 'confronting' medical issues, since she was planning to have gastric bypass surgery. Ms Patterson denied she prepared a poisoned beef wellington for Simon 'just in case' he turned up at the lunch. 'And when he didn't show up for lunch … you threw it in your rubbish bin,' Dr Rogers said. 'I did put the pastry and mushrooms in the rubbish bin,' she replied. Dr Rogers also asked Ms Patterson why she invited the Wilkinsons to lunch. 'I really liked them and I wanted to have a stronger relationship with them,' she said. Dr Rogers suggested she invited them because she thought it would make it more likely that Don, Gail and Simon would come, but she denied that was the reason. Later, Ms Patterson was asked about records that showed a map about death caps – on citizen science website iNaturalist – was accessed on May 28, 2022, on a computer in her house. 'I don't have a specific memory of this day or this internet search, but my evidence is it's possible, because I remember at some point wanting to find out if death cap mushrooms grow in South Gippsland and finding out that they do not,' she said. Ms Patterson told the jury on Wednesday she found out mushrooms growing on her property were 'probably toxic to dogs' and she wanted to see if death caps grew in the area. The trial, before Justice Christopher Beale, continues.
The Age
9 hours ago
- The Age
Lies, damned lies: The admissions and denials of an accused killer cook
Whether Patterson had cancer and had shared this with others was discussed repeatedly. Sole lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson recalled in his evidence that it was at the lethal lunch that Patterson broke the news of her cancer, telling her guests she was anxious about telling her children. Patterson's estranged husband, Simon Patterson, told the jury that while his family was sick in hospital after the lunch, his father relayed to him that Patterson had said she was going to have chemotherapy and surgery. Don told him Patterson said she had been diagnosed with ovarian cancer and needed help breaking the news to her two children. But Patterson told the jury on Thursday she had never been diagnosed with any type of cancer and went on to quibble with the suggestion she'd told her guests she had been. During cross-examination, this was referred to as the accused woman's 'so-called cancer diagnosis'. Instead, Patterson suggested she had researched the symptoms online for things, including stage-four cancer, because she was worried she may be very unwell. The 50-year-old denied doing so as part of any type of ploy to convince her family she was seriously ill. '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. 'This would allow you to tell a more convincing lie about having cancer?' Patterson replied: 'I mean, theoretically that's true, but that's not what I did. I was concerned that I had ovarian cancer, I was concerned that I had something wrong with my brain.' Patterson agreed she didn't have any medical appointments relating to cancer in the lead-up to the lunch, despite telling Gail she was undergoing medical investigations. She did, however, claim to have had a pre-surgery appointment booked for a gastric bypass to lose weight. Rogers asked Patterson if she purposely carried on the fiction that she had a serious illness. Patterson agreed. The foraging In her recorded interview with police on the afternoon of August 5, 2023, Patterson said she'd never foraged for mushrooms in the wild. 'Is that something you've done in the past?' Detective Leading Senior Constable Stephen Eppingstall asked Patterson at the Wonthaggi Police Station. 'Foraged for mushrooms?' 'Never,' Patterson replied. While on the stand this week, Patterson's story changed. She told the jury she developed a love for mushrooms and an interest in foraging for them from early 2020 during the COVID lockdowns. She told the jury she started off by picking field mushrooms. Then she began picking others, such as horse mushrooms and slippery jacks, as she grew more confident in identifying the species she picked in her yard, the nearby botanical gardens and a rail trail between Korumburra, Loch and Leongatha. She said that she initially believed the mushrooms she'd used in the fatal beef Wellington were prepackaged button mushrooms from Woolworths and dried mushrooms she'd bought from an Asian grocer in Melbourne. As the investigation went on, though, she said she began to think that maybe dried foraged mushrooms had also made their way into the meal. She told the jury she now accepted that death cap mushrooms had been inside the pastry-encased parcels. While under cross-examination, Patterson agreed it was on August 1, 2023, that Simon first asked if she'd used the dehydrator to kill his parents. She said it was then that she began to wonder whether other mushrooms may have made their way into the meal. 'You agree you told police in your record of interview that you loved Don and Gail?' Rogers asked. 'Yes,' Patterson replied. Rogers: 'Surely, if you had loved them, you would've immediately notified medical authorities about there being a possibility that the foraged mushrooms had gone into the container with the Chinese mushrooms?' 'Well I didn't. I did not tell anybody,' Patterson responded. 'They did love me and I did love them. I do love them.' The dehydrator A tax invoice displayed on screens across the courtroom showed the purchase of a black Sunbeam dehydrator, costing more than $200, and paid for under Erin Patterson's name, address and phone number. Loading Patterson agreed she bought it and used it to dehydrate mushrooms before dumping it at the local tip the day after she was released from hospital because, she claimed, she panicked and feared her children could be taken away from her. In her police interview, the court heard, she denied ever owning such an appliance, or ever having one in her house. 'Those are lies?' her defence lawyer asked. 'Yes,' Patterson replied. 'I had disposed of it a few days earlier in the context of thinking that maybe mushrooms I foraged or the meal I prepared was responsible for making people sick, and then on the Saturday, Detective Eppingstall told me that Gail and Heather had passed away.' She denied knowingly picking or dehydrating death cap mushrooms to cook and serve to her lunch guests. The prosecution case When asked by Mandy about the prosecution case against her, Patterson denied lying about using Asian grocer mushrooms or pretending to be sick after the lunch. 'I am going to ask you a series of questions now, formal questions, about what the prosecution says is the case against you,' Mandy said. 'Did you lie to people when you said that you'd only cooked one batch of mushrooms for the beef Wellingtons?' Patterson: 'No, I didn't lie.' Mandy: 'Were each of the beef Wellingtons on each of the five plates that you served up the same?' Patterson: 'Yes.' Mandy: 'Did you lie about purchasing dried mushrooms from an Asian grocer in the Oakleigh area in April of 2023?' Patterson: 'No.' Mandy: 'Did you lie about using those mushrooms from the Asian grocer in the beef Wellingtons?' Patterson: 'No, I didn't.' Mandy: 'Did you pretend to be sick following the lunch?' Patterson: 'No, I didn't.' Mandy: 'Did you intentionally include death cap mushrooms in the beef Wellingtons you prepared on 29 July?' Patterson: 'No.' 'Eye-roll emojis' Patterson was questioned about some messages to her online friends in which she appeared to mock her in-laws' faith with 'eye-roll emojis'. Patterson denied that the messages were mocking – she was frustrated that the family's only solution to her and Simon's issues were to pray, she said. Rogers read out a message Patterson sent to friends on December 6, 2022, about being told by Don that he could not adjudicate in a matter between Erin and Simon because Simon would not share his side of the story. The message, shown to the jury, concluded with two eye-rolling emojis and the sentence: 'This family, I swear to f-----g God.' Patterson told the court: 'The eye-roll emojis was in regard to that being the only solution.' Rogers showed Patterson another message, in which she wrote that Don had called her the previous night to say there could be a solution to her problem if she and Simon got together and prayed, followed by two emojis. Rogers suggested the emojis were also eye-rolling emojis. 'There's a better eye-rolling emoji than this,' Patterson said.
Sydney Morning Herald
9 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Lies, damned lies: The admissions and denials of an accused killer cook
Whether Patterson had cancer and had shared this with others was discussed repeatedly. Sole lunch survivor Ian Wilkinson recalled in his evidence that it was at the lethal lunch that Patterson broke the news of her cancer, telling her guests she was anxious about telling her children. Patterson's estranged husband, Simon Patterson, told the jury that while his family was sick in hospital after the lunch, his father relayed to him that Patterson had said she was going to have chemotherapy and surgery. Don told him Patterson said she had been diagnosed with ovarian cancer and needed help breaking the news to her two children. But Patterson told the jury on Thursday she had never been diagnosed with any type of cancer and went on to quibble with the suggestion she'd told her guests she had been. During cross-examination, this was referred to as the accused woman's 'so-called cancer diagnosis'. Instead, Patterson suggested she had researched the symptoms online for things, including stage-four cancer, because she was worried she may be very unwell. The 50-year-old denied doing so as part of any type of ploy to convince her family she was seriously ill. '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. 'This would allow you to tell a more convincing lie about having cancer?' Patterson replied: 'I mean, theoretically that's true, but that's not what I did. I was concerned that I had ovarian cancer, I was concerned that I had something wrong with my brain.' Patterson agreed she didn't have any medical appointments relating to cancer in the lead-up to the lunch, despite telling Gail she was undergoing medical investigations. She did, however, claim to have had a pre-surgery appointment booked for a gastric bypass to lose weight. Rogers asked Patterson if she purposely carried on the fiction that she had a serious illness. Patterson agreed. The foraging In her recorded interview with police on the afternoon of August 5, 2023, Patterson said she'd never foraged for mushrooms in the wild. 'Is that something you've done in the past?' Detective Leading Senior Constable Stephen Eppingstall asked Patterson at the Wonthaggi Police Station. 'Foraged for mushrooms?' 'Never,' Patterson replied. While on the stand this week, Patterson's story changed. She told the jury she developed a love for mushrooms and an interest in foraging for them from early 2020 during the COVID lockdowns. She told the jury she started off by picking field mushrooms. Then she began picking others, such as horse mushrooms and slippery jacks, as she grew more confident in identifying the species she picked in her yard, the nearby botanical gardens and a rail trail between Korumburra, Loch and Leongatha. She said that she initially believed the mushrooms she'd used in the fatal beef Wellington were prepackaged button mushrooms from Woolworths and dried mushrooms she'd bought from an Asian grocer in Melbourne. As the investigation went on, though, she said she began to think that maybe dried foraged mushrooms had also made their way into the meal. She told the jury she now accepted that death cap mushrooms had been inside the pastry-encased parcels. While under cross-examination, Patterson agreed it was on August 1, 2023, that Simon first asked if she'd used the dehydrator to kill his parents. She said it was then that she began to wonder whether other mushrooms may have made their way into the meal. 'You agree you told police in your record of interview that you loved Don and Gail?' Rogers asked. 'Yes,' Patterson replied. Rogers: 'Surely, if you had loved them, you would've immediately notified medical authorities about there being a possibility that the foraged mushrooms had gone into the container with the Chinese mushrooms?' 'Well I didn't. I did not tell anybody,' Patterson responded. 'They did love me and I did love them. I do love them.' The dehydrator A tax invoice displayed on screens across the courtroom showed the purchase of a black Sunbeam dehydrator, costing more than $200, and paid for under Erin Patterson's name, address and phone number. Loading Patterson agreed she bought it and used it to dehydrate mushrooms before dumping it at the local tip the day after she was released from hospital because, she claimed, she panicked and feared her children could be taken away from her. In her police interview, the court heard, she denied ever owning such an appliance, or ever having one in her house. 'Those are lies?' her defence lawyer asked. 'Yes,' Patterson replied. 'I had disposed of it a few days earlier in the context of thinking that maybe mushrooms I foraged or the meal I prepared was responsible for making people sick, and then on the Saturday, Detective Eppingstall told me that Gail and Heather had passed away.' She denied knowingly picking or dehydrating death cap mushrooms to cook and serve to her lunch guests. The prosecution case When asked by Mandy about the prosecution case against her, Patterson denied lying about using Asian grocer mushrooms or pretending to be sick after the lunch. 'I am going to ask you a series of questions now, formal questions, about what the prosecution says is the case against you,' Mandy said. 'Did you lie to people when you said that you'd only cooked one batch of mushrooms for the beef Wellingtons?' Patterson: 'No, I didn't lie.' Mandy: 'Were each of the beef Wellingtons on each of the five plates that you served up the same?' Patterson: 'Yes.' Mandy: 'Did you lie about purchasing dried mushrooms from an Asian grocer in the Oakleigh area in April of 2023?' Patterson: 'No.' Mandy: 'Did you lie about using those mushrooms from the Asian grocer in the beef Wellingtons?' Patterson: 'No, I didn't.' Mandy: 'Did you pretend to be sick following the lunch?' Patterson: 'No, I didn't.' Mandy: 'Did you intentionally include death cap mushrooms in the beef Wellingtons you prepared on 29 July?' Patterson: 'No.' 'Eye-roll emojis' Patterson was questioned about some messages to her online friends in which she appeared to mock her in-laws' faith with 'eye-roll emojis'. Patterson denied that the messages were mocking – she was frustrated that the family's only solution to her and Simon's issues were to pray, she said. Rogers read out a message Patterson sent to friends on December 6, 2022, about being told by Don that he could not adjudicate in a matter between Erin and Simon because Simon would not share his side of the story. The message, shown to the jury, concluded with two eye-rolling emojis and the sentence: 'This family, I swear to f-----g God.' Patterson told the court: 'The eye-roll emojis was in regard to that being the only solution.' Rogers showed Patterson another message, in which she wrote that Don had called her the previous night to say there could be a solution to her problem if she and Simon got together and prayed, followed by two emojis. Rogers suggested the emojis were also eye-rolling emojis. 'There's a better eye-rolling emoji than this,' Patterson said.
