Mushroom cook did not have a motive for murder: defence
Tara Cosoleto |
Mushroom cook Erin Patterson did not have a motive to kill members of her ex-husband’s family and never planned to serve them death cap mushrooms, her lawyer has argued.
Barrister Colin Mandy SC made the assertions in his closing submissions on Tuesday as his client’s triple-murder trial reached its final stages in the Victorian Supreme Court.
Patterson, 50, has denied she intentionally poisoned her former in-laws Don and Gail Patterson, Gail’s sister Heather, and Heather’s husband Ian Wilkinson.
Don, Gail and Heather all died after consuming the July 29, 2023 beef Wellington lunch at Patterson’s home in regional Victoria, while Ian survived.
Mr Mandy told the jury the prosecution had to prove Patterson intended to kill or cause serious harm to her lunch guests, and a key element of intention was motive.
He criticised the prosecutor’s claims there was animosity between Patterson, her ex-husband Simon and her in-laws Don and Gail in the lead-up to the lunch.
Mr Mandy said the dispute – over child support – happened at least seven months before the lunch and it appeared to resolve amicably.
He accused the prosecution of “scratching around” for a motive when all the evidence pointed to Patterson having a positive relationship with her in-laws.
“Don and Gail had never been anything but kind and understanding to Erin,” Mr Mandy told the jury.
“There was no reason at all for her to hurt them in any way.”
The barrister noted Patterson’s children were close to Don and Gail and it did not make sense for his client to take such wonderful grandparents away from them.
Mr Mandy also criticised the prosecution’s claims Patterson had been planning the murderous lunch for months.
He said it was inevitable scrutiny would turn to the person who cooked the lunch if four guests became gravely unwell and yet Patterson made it clear the lunch was at her home.
Mr Mandy noted Patterson invited her guests well in advance of the lunch and other family members knew the meal was happening.
Patterson also told police where the meal leftovers were as soon as she was asked, without making any attempts to conceal them, Mr Mandy said.
“She must have been confident there was no poison in them to do that,” he said.
Pointing to the dehydrator Patterson discarded after the meal, the barrister told the jury she had gone to the tip in her own car and paid for the disposal under her own name.
Patterson would have discarded the dehydrator months earlier and not told friends or family she owned one if she was really planning a murder, Mr Mandy said.
Concluding her final statements earlier on Tuesday, crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC told jurors they should find Patterson guilty of all charges because she deliberately sourced death cap mushrooms and served them to her guests to either kill or seriously injure them.
The prosecutor alleged Patterson then told repeated lies to family members, medical professionals, health department staff and police.
“She told lies upon lies because she knew the truth would implicate her,” Dr Rogers said.
The prosecutor claimed Patterson lied about where she sourced the mushrooms, having a dehydrator and feeding her children the lunch leftovers.
She also concealed her real phone from police and instead provided up a “dummy” phone when officers raided her home, Dr Rogers said.
The prosecutor also claimed Patterson tried to deceive the jury when she gave evidence about her gastric bypass surgery, bingeing and purging after the lunch, and going to the toilet on the side of the road.
“She has told too many lies and you should reject her evidence,” she said.
The trial before Justice Christopher Beale continues on Wednesday.
AAP
