Four Acts of Deception: How Erin Patterson's Plan Unraveled

Crown Prosecutor Nanette Rogers delivers closing arguments in week eight of Erin Patterson's triple murder trial, outlining four alleged acts of deception in what the prosecution describes as a carefully planned poisoning. The defence maintains that the death cap mushroom poisonings were a tragic mistake, not intentional murder.

• Prosecution claims Ms Patterson fabricated an ovarian cancer story to distract from her alleged murder plot
• Individual beef wellingtons allegedly used to conceal death cap mushrooms, deviating from traditional shared-log recipe
• Different coloured plate allegedly used by Ms Patterson to identify her safe, non-poisoned meal
• Patterson's claim about buying dried mushrooms from an unremembered Asian grocery store called "not believable"
• Prosecution argues Ms Patterson feigned illness after the lunch, with symptoms inconsistent with actual mushroom poisoning
• Location data suggests Patterson may have travelled to areas where death cap mushrooms grow
• Ian Wilkinson, the sole survivor, testified that Ms Patterson used a different coloured plate from other guests
• Alleged cover-up attempts include disposing of a dehydrator and concealing a mobile phone from investigators

Please visit mushroommurdertrial.com to subscribe to this podcast and our newsletter for exclusive updates, including previews of our upcoming book about this case. You can also support our work by buying us a coffee from $5, which helps cover editing, studio hire, insurance, and other production costs.

Chapters

• 0:00 Trial Introduction & Updates
• 1:05 Four Acts of Deception
• 3:15 Suspicious Behavior After the Lunch
• 7:20 Trial Conclusion & Podcast Information

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:02

Closing addresses. Today got underway in Erin Patterson's triple murder trial, which is now in its eighth can you believe it? Week in the Supreme Court of Victoria in Morwell. Hello and welcome to the Mushroom Murder Trial podcast. My name is Lisa. Before we launch into today's updates, please make sure you go to my website, mushroommurdertrialcom to subscribe. If you haven't yet. Please subscribe to this podcast on your preferred platform so you never miss an episode.

Speaker 1: 0:35

Now getting back to Ms Patterson, the mother of two is pleading not guilty to murdering three relatives and the attempted murder of a fourth by serving them a beef wellington meal that contained poisonous death cat mushrooms. Ms Patterson's defence claims this was a tragic mistake. Now today, crown Prosecutor Nanette Rogers, sc told the court the Leon Gather woman had engaged in four substantial acts of deception while carrying out her alleged crimes. The prosecutor said the first of these was her allegedly fabricated ovarian cancer claim made to the lunch guests, devised as an elaborate cover to conceal the alleged poisoning plot. Dr Rogers said the 50-year-old fabricated a story about a potential cancer diagnosis in order to gain sympathy and to distract from her alleged motives. Dr Rogers argued that Ms Patterson went to considerable lengths to make the deception convincing, researching both brain and ovarian cancers. Why would she invent such a story, dr Rogers asked the jurors, because she'd never expected her guests to survive and reveal the lie. She believes it would die with them. Ms Patterson's claim that the lunch was meant as a thank you to her relatives and a showcase for her garden. As a thank you to her relatives and a showcase for her garden. Dr Rogers asserted that Ms Patterson had intentionally excluded her own children from the gathering to ensure they would not be harmed by the poisoned food.

Speaker 1: 2:16

According to the prosecution, one of the most crucial aspects of the alleged deception was the way the toxic death cap mushrooms were concealed. Dr Rogers said Ms Patterson had allegedly deliberately placed death cap mushrooms inside individually prepared beef wellingtons, deviating from the traditional shared log-style version that's typically found in recipes. Dr Rogers said the intention behind the meal was deeply deceptive, Using what appeared to be a home-cooked lunch as a method for delivering a fatal dose of poison. The prosecution argued that the meal itself became the vehicle for harm by preparing the beef wellingtons as individual portions rather than the single log the beef wellingtons as individual portions rather than the single log, ms Patterson could make it seem as if she was eating the same meal while avoiding the poisoned servings. Dr Rogers added that, while no direct evidence pinpointed the exact source of the mushrooms, ms Patterson was known to use the iNaturalist website and had more than likely viewed entries specifically related to death cat mushrooms. Location data suggested she may have also travelled to areas such as Loch and Outram where the toxic fungi had previously been identified. A photo taken on one of her devices allegedly showed mushrooms on her kitchen bench which the prosecution argues were death caps.

Speaker 1: 3:57

Dr Rogers also drew attention to testimony from Anne Wilkinson, the only survivor of the lunch, who said that Ms Patterson used a different coloured plate from the rest of the guests. The prosecution claimed this was a deliberate act allowing her to identify which meal was safe for her to eat. She separated her meal to avoid ingesting the poison she had added to the others, the court was told the prosecution challenged Ms Patterson's statement that she bought dried mushrooms for the meal from an Asian grocery store in several suburbs in Melbourne, pointing out that she had an unusually sharp memory throughout the trial, including recalling the specific days of past events, but could not remember which grocery store she went into. Dr Rogers questioned why Ms Patterson could not remember the location of this particular shop. She said that the claim is simply not believable and called it a falsehood that Ms Patterson repeated time and time again.

Speaker 1: 5:04

A third major deceptive, according to the Crown, involved Ms Patterson pretending to be sick. After the lunch, dr Rogers told the jury that her symptoms did not match those of the poisoned guests and argued that this performance was staged to avoid suspicion. The only reason to feign illness was because she knew she hadn't consumed the toxic mushrooms and that appearing too healthy would raise the alarm. Simon Patterson, the accused estranged husband, testified that she told him she became unwell shortly after the guests left, experiencing diarrhea. However, dr Rogers highlighted that the actual victims only began showing symptoms around midnight, which aligned with the known timeline for death cap mushroom poisoning that's a medicine and pointed out how unlikely it was that someone suffering severe gastrointestinal symptoms would choose to take a two-hour drive from Leangatha the following day. Dr Rogers further alleged that Ms Patterson's decision to leave hospital before receiving treatment suggested guilty knowledge. Ms Patterson hadn't eaten the mushrooms. The jury was told she rushed home to figure out what to do next and how she would explain her relatively mild condition. As well as this, not one health worker in two hospitals and in an ambulance saw Erin Patterson being actually unwell. The prosecution concluded the day by introducing what it described as a fourth layer of deception, attempts to cover up what had occurred. Dr Rogers accused Ms Patterson of lying about feeding leftovers to her children and about the origin of the mushrooms used in the meal. She also claimed Ms Patterson discarded the dehydrator and concealed her regular mobile phone from investigators.

Speaker 1: 7:14

The trial continues tomorrow and I will be back reporting for you then as well. So thank you so much for listening. For more information, go to my website mushroommurdertrialcom. Make sure you subscribe to my newsletter and my social media details they're in the show notes as well and if you feel like rewarding me for all the hours that I've put into this work, I would greatly appreciate it if you could buy me a coffee from $5 as a thank you, as some of you have. Thank you, sometimes I do spend it on Caramello Koalas, but I do spend it on editing, studio hire, liability insurance, sound voiceovers and there's exclusive membership material for you. But also, if you get on the newsletter I am going to be sharing with you guys first the beginnings of my book about this case.

Speaker 1: 8:11

So get on there, it's something for free my newsletter. Why would you ever? My friend, mr Tony would say cheap is good. Why would you turn your back on something that's free? You just can't. So look, we're now in the final days of the Patterson case, so maybe this time next week we might have a verdict. We shall see. Thank you so much. Have a wonderful day. Bye.