Table of Contents
Key events
Show key events only
Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature
‘Four calculated deceptions’
Earlier, Rogers told the jury that there were “four calculated deceptions” made by Patterson that were “at the heart of the case”:
1. That Patterson “fabricated” a cancer claim as the reason for the lunch.
2. Lethal doses of poison “secreted” in beef wellingtons she served her guests.
3. Patterson’s attempts to make it seem like she also suffered from death cap mushroom poisoning.
4. A sustained cover-up by Patterson to “conceal the truth” after the lunch.
Share
Updated at 21.55 EDT
Rogers says the phone location data showed the connections from Patterson’s phone to base stations in Outtrim and Loch were “outliers”.
“Visiting these areas was not something that the accused normally did,” Rogers says.
She says these were not part of Patterson’s “normal activities”.
Share
Rogers says the death cap mushroom sighting posts on iNaturalist showed the toxic fungi was growing in Loch and Outtrim in the months before the lunch.
It also shows they were made public with location data, Rogers says.
Rogers turns to the evidence about Patterson’s phone location data.
She says telecommunications expert Dr Matthew Sorell could only conclude there was a possible visit to Loch on 18 April 2023. But Rogers says the jury should consider the phone location evidence in conjunction with other evidence. She says this includes the fact that Patterson purchased a dehydrator on the same day.
Rogers says there is further evidence that on 22 May 2023 Patterson’s phone was “stationary” in the Outtrim area for a period of about 25 minutes.
Share
Updated at 21.35 EDT
Rogers says the evidence suggests Patterson was aware of the citizen science iNaturalist website which she used to visit web pages about death cap mushrooms.
The jury has been shown a series of artefacts on a Cooler Master computer seized from Patterson’s house, Rogers says.
She says the prosecution alleges Patterson used the computer to search for the iNaturalist website on the search engine Bing in May 2022.
“Clearly this was a targeted search. Not browsing on the internet,” Rogers says.
Rogers says one of the webpages, which the prosecution alleges Patterson visited, showed a world map marking sightings of death cap mushrooms.
“The accused did not navigate to other types of mushrooms. She did not meander around the website. She went directly to death cap mushrooms,” Roger says.
“You can safely infer it was the accused making these searches … because at the very same time … they Googled Korumburra Middle Pub and put in a food order.”
She says the jury has seen the records of this order which was placed under Patterson’s name.
Share
Updated at 21.36 EDT
Rogers says Patterson chose the meal for the lunch and was responsible for selecting the ingredients.
Rogers says the recipe from the RecipeTin Eats book, which Patterson told police she used for the beef wellington, did not call for “multiple individual” pasties.
Rogers says Patterson did not prepare a shared dish where each guest had a slice from a single beef wellington.
“Why deviate so significantly from an unfamiliar recipe … ”
Rogers says Patterson did so to ensure she did not become unwell from the meal.
Rogers says the week prior to the lunch Patterson had purchased 1.75kg of mushrooms.
“There was absolutely no need to add an entire packet of dried mushrooms.”
She tells the jury to reject Patterson’s testimony that she ate the 1kg of mushrooms she bought on 23 July 2023 – six days prior to the lunch.
Rogers says the death cap mushrooms in the meal were prepared differently from the button mushrooms which were chopped.
“They were most likely to be prepared differently,” she says.
She says they were likely prepared in a way to become “unidentifiable”.
Share
Updated at 21.23 EDT
Rogers says Patterson made “bald-faced lies” to her in-laws about her medical appointments.
“She knew how to tell convincing lies when it came to the cancer because she had put in the research,” she says.
“The prosecution says the accused put considerable thought and effort into this fake cancer claim and she deliberately set the trail in motion with Don and Gail.”
Rogers says Patterson agreed in court that she had never been diagnosed with cancer.
Rogers says Patterson did not think she would be questioned about her cancer lie because she intended to kill her lunch guests.
“Her lie would die with them.”
Share
Rogers says it was “entirely” Patterson’s plan that her two children would not be present at the lunch.
“She made sure the children were away at McDonald’s at the cinema by the time the lunch guests were arriving.”
She says this was a “deliberate” step by the accused to ensure the children would not be harmed by the “poison she was about to serve”.
Rogers turns to evidence by Ian Wilkinson that Paterson announced she had cancer after the lunch.
She says the jury should reject Patterson’s claim that she only told them she may need cancer treatment.
“This was the accused simply trying to minimise the lie she told her lunch guests,” she says.
Rogers says Patterson created an “elaborate lie” regarding cancer.
She says the lie was “planted” before the lunch. She points to messages between Patterson and her mother-in-law Gail Patterson when they messaged the month before the lunch about medical appointments the accused had fabricated.
Rogers reminds the jury that that police reviewed Patterson’s medical records and found no evidence of her having an MRI or needle biopsy.
Share
Updated at 21.08 EDT
Prosecution begins closing address
Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC is delivering her closing address to the jury.
She says Patterson opted to prepare individual serves of beef wellingtons for the lunch on 29 July 2023, which gave her “control” over the meal which she “exercised with devastating effect”.
“It allowed her to give the appearance of sharing the same meal,” Rogers says.
She asks the jurors to consider what “other reasonable possibility” could explain the four lunch guests falling ill.
Rogers says the evidence surrounding the lunch invitation should satisfy the jurors that Patterson fabricated her cancer claim to create a reason for her otherwise “unusual” meal.
She says Patterson gave her estranged husband, Simon, multiple reasons to attend the lunch:
“She painted a picture of a gathering which was not just social but contained important family business,” she says.
Share
Updated at 20.53 EDT
What the jury heard last time
Here’s a recap of what the jury heard when court last sat on Thursday:
1. A clinic where Patterson said she had a pre-surgery appointment for a gastric-bypass procedure offered liposuction until mid-2024, the court heard. Patterson previously told the court she was also looking into liposuction. She said she lied to her lunch guests about having cancer treatment because she was embarrassed about planned weight-loss surgery.
2. Patterson denied lying about her estranged husband, Simon, accusing her of poisoning his parents with a food dehydrator in the days after the lunch.
3. Patterson rejected the prosecution’s suggestion she performed three factory resets in August 2023 on a phone she handed to police to “conceal” its “true contents”.
4. In her final moments of cross-examination, Patterson denied she deliberately sourced death cap mushrooms in 2022, included the toxic fungi in beef wellingtons she served and intended to kill her lunch guests.
5. The defence closed its case. Justice Christopher Beale tells the jury the evidence in the trial has concluded.
Share
Updated at 20.35 EDT
Welcome to day 32 of Erin Patterson’s triple-murder trial.
The evidence in Patterson’s trial concluded last week. In the coming days, the prosecution and defence will deliver their closing arguments to the jury. Justice Christopher Beale will then issue instructions to the jurors ahead of their deliberations.
Patterson, 50, faces three charges of murder and one charge of attempted murder relating to a beef wellington lunch she served at her house in Leongatha in regional Victoria on 29 July 2023.
She is accused of murdering her in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, and her estranged husband’s aunt, Heather Wilkinson. The attempted murder charge relates to Heather’s husband, Ian Wilkinson.
She has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The prosecution alleges Patterson deliberately poisoned her lunch guests with “murderous intent”, but her lawyers say the poisoning was a tragic accident.
Share
Updated at 20.29 EDT
