Husband feared Australia's mushroom killer had poisoned him before
Home cook Erin Patterson was found guilty in July of murdering her husband's parents and elderly aunt in 2023, lacing their beef Wellington lunch with lethal death cap mushrooms.
A series of potentially damning allegations about Patterson's behaviour in the lead-up to the meal were withheld from the jury to give the mother-of-two a fair trial.
Supreme Court Justice Christopher Beale on Friday rejected an application to keep these allegations secret.
Patterson tried to kill her estranged husband Simon on three occasions between 2021 and 2022, police alleged in one of the major claims not heard during the trial.
She was accused of serving him poisoned dishes of pasta bolognese, chicken curry and a vegetable wrap, according to freshly released evidence.
Simon told a pre-trial hearing in October last year how Patterson had asked him to taste test a batch of curries she had made.
"I remember Erin saying that the purpose of the taste test was so she could, I guess, customise future curry production for our respective tastes," he said in testimony suppressed until now.
He later fell ill after eating a mild chicken korma served by Patterson on a camping trip in 2022.
"At first I felt hot, especially in my head, and that led to feeling nauseous and then that led to me quite suddenly needing to vomit," he said.
Simon eventually fell into a coma before receiving life-saving surgery to remove a section of his bowel.
He later told doctor Christopher Ford that he had come to suspect Patterson might be deliberately poisoning him.
He became worried when Patterson offered him a batch of homemade cookies, Ford said.
"Simon was apprehensive about eating the cookies, as he felt they may be poisoned," the doctor told a pre-trial hearing last year.
"He reported to me that while they were away, Erin called several times and enquired about whether he had eaten any of the cookies."
When his parents fell gravely ill after eating at Patterson's house, Simon would regretfully confide those fears to his family.
"He wanted to tell us that he had suspected his own illnesses had been a deliberate act," cousin Ruth Dubois told a pre-trial hearing.
"He had stopped eating food that Erin had prepared, because he suspected that she might have been messing with it.
"And that he was really sorry that he hadn't told our family."
Prosecutors dropped those charges before the start of Patterson's trial, with tight restrictions preventing media from revealing any details.
- Lethal fungus -
Patterson hosted an intimate meal in July 2023 that started with good-natured banter and earnest prayer -- but ended with three guests dead.
A 12-person jury found the 50-year-old guilty of murdering Simon's parents, Don and Gail Patterson, as well as his aunt Heather Wilkinson.
She was also found guilty of attempting to murder Heather's husband Ian, a well-known pastor at the local Baptist church.
Simon had been invited to that lunch as well, but pulled out because he felt "uncomfortable".
At the time, Patterson's relationship with Simon was starting to turn sour.
The pair -- long estranged but still legally married -- had been fighting over Simon's child support contributions.
Patterson's trial drew podcasters, film crews and true crime fans to the rural town of Morwell, a sedate hamlet in the state of Victoria better known for prize-winning roses.
Newspapers from New York to New Delhi followed every twist of what many now simply call the "mushroom murders".
Throughout a trial lasting more than two months, Patterson maintained the beef-and-pastry dish was accidentally poisoned with death cap mushrooms, the world's most-lethal fungus.
Death cap mushrooms are easily mistaken for other edible varieties, and reportedly possess a sweet taste that belies their potent toxicity.
Patterson will return to court on August 25 for hearings that will determine how long she spends behind bars.
Her legal team has 28 days after sentencing to appeal both her criminal convictions and her sentence.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
29 minutes ago
- ABC News
WA government to introduce 'post and boast' laws amid concerns about protests, freedom of speech
Footage posted on social media of two stolen cars hooning around a regional town in Western Australia is the sort of thing that has prompted new legislation set to be debated in state parliament this week. The videos showed children with their faces covered, ramming police cars and bragging about their crimes. Governments around the country initially called on the Commonwealth to pressure social media platforms to crack down on the content, but they are also taking their own action. Last month, the WA government introduced a "post and boast" bill to parliament targeting so-called "crimefluencers" who boast about their offences on social media. Some groups are concerned the proposed law goes too far, is too broad and will have a "chilling effect" on free speech. So what will happen if the bill is passed as it stands? It is an amendment to the Criminal Code, named the "Post and Boast Offence". It would make it an offence to "disseminate material" that depicts a crime with the purpose of boasting or glorifying the criminal behaviour or encouraging others to engage in the same conduct. In essence, the government said it was targeting people who posted crimes on social media "that may humiliate, intimidate or victimise a person, increase the reputation or notoriety of the offender, glorify the conduct, or encourage copycat behaviour". That includes a range of criminal offences — assaults, stealing and robbery, property damage, dangerous or reckless driving, racial harassment and inciting racial hatred, and Nazi symbols and salutes. The legislation makes clear that a person can be prosecuted regardless of whether they have been prosecuted, or convicted of, the offence depicted in their post. The maximum penalty is three years in jail, one year more than the penalty for the same offence in Victoria. Courts will also be able to order the person to "remove, retract, recover, delete, destroy or forfeit to the state" the post in question, punishable by 12 months in jail and a $12,000 fine if they do not comply. The government says the changes aim to prevent further harm and re-traumatisation of victims, meaning there will be exceptions where people are not motivated by malicious intent and are posting for another reason. The list of activities that will not be penalised includes material posted "for a genuine scientific, educational, academic, artistic, literary, satirical or entertainment purpose". A journalist or news publisher reporting news or current affairs will not be prosecuted either. And there will be no penalty if the conduct depicted in the video is fictional or artificially created, if it was posted to denounce or warn against criminal behaviour. There are also specific exceptions for members of a law enforcement agency or intelligence agency. Critics say while the government claims the intent of the laws is to stop criminal behaviour, the legislation's impact will be much broader. They have pointed to legal comment by University of Western Australia Associate Professor of Law Murray Wesson, who concluded the proposed bill had "the potential to infringe the constitutionally protected implied freedom of political communication". "This is due to the extraordinary breadth of the offence, in particular the wide definitions of dissemination [which includes dissemination of material to one other person] and relevant offence [which includes unlawful assemblies and breaches of the peace]," he wrote. Conservation Council WA executive director Matt Roberts was concerned the law could stop peaceful protest, and would be "stifling the voice of the public" on what they wanted from the government. Critics like Mr Roberts argue people who took part in the successful protest movement in 2016 and 2017 to stop the Roe 8 highway extension and prevent the destruction of the Beeliar wetlands, backed by Labor at the time, could have been charged under this new legislation, but the government denies they would have been charged. At the time when Labor was in opposition, people chained themselves to construction machinery and pushed over gates, with police charging some protesters with trespassing, obstruction and refusing to give details to police. "Just for sharing that, people would be criminalised under these laws," Mr Roberts said. WA Greens leader Brad Pettitt labelled said the laws would have "a chilling effect ... on freedom of expression and the right to protest". He said the suffragettes who campaigned for women's right to vote could be imprisoned today under this law, and the Franklin River dam protests in Tasmania during the 1980s would have also been targeted Greens MLC Sophie McNeil said she would be charged over videos she had shared of activists raising attention about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. "Right now you've got members of parliament who could be eligible for three years in jail simply for supporting peaceful, non-violent protest. And that's absolutely outrageous," she said. The legislation does not specifically mention protests as a legitimate defence from prosecution, but WA Premier Roger Cook was adamant protests were not the focus. He said the causes people were protesting against, and the activity of protest, were "absolutely not the focus of these laws". "Highlighting the behaviour or observing that the behaviour has taken place and commenting in relation to the cause will not of itself attract the attention of the post and boast laws," he said. The premier said the law's primary focus was crime, adding: "It's about people who glorify criminal and unlawful behaviour." He said he wanted to ensure people in WA could still protest and express their freedom of speech. The laws will be debated in parliament this week. Labor has the numbers to pass the laws, and the opposition has said it will be supporting the legislation. But opposition legal affairs spokesperson Nick Goiran questioned why only some criminal behaviour was included instead of all crime. He noted the Greens planned to refer the bill to parliament's Legislative Committee and added the opposition would support a three-month inquiry. Dr Pettitt said the Greens would push for a raft of amendments, namely excluding non-violent protest and ensuring it doesn't "criminalise a whole new generation of young people".
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Pilot to give evidence in trial of crocodile wrangler
The pilot who survived a fatal helicopter accident in February 2022 which claimed the life of Chris "Willow" Wilson, is expected to give evidence today in the Supreme Court trial of celebrity crocodile wrangler, Matt Wright. Mr Wright has pleaded not guilty to three counts of attempting to pervert the course of justice for his alleged interference with an investigation into the crash. The pilot - Sebastian Robinson - survived the accident but sustained lifelong injuries.
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
Two found dead in home in Melbourne suburbs, man arrested
A man and woman have been found dead in a home in Melbourne's suburbs. The alarm was raised at about 10pm on Monday, with police making the grim discovery at a property on Adrienne Crescent at Mount Waverley. Police say the man and woman have not yet been identified. Images from the scene overnight show heavily armed police surrounding the house as the street was cordoned off. A 34-year-old man was arrested nearby at Westall train station at about 1.40am on Tuesday. '(He) will be interviewed by detectives in relation to the deaths,' a police spokesperson said early on Tuesday. 'At this stage police are not looking for anyone else in relation to the incident.' No charges have been laid. The homicide squad's Detective Inspector Dean Thomas is expected to provide more details later on Tuesday morning.
