novaphile
Quester of Doglets
Mushroom killer arrested
- Thread starter a_unique_person
- Start date
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,561
change of plans
My conjecture is that she was planning a murder-suicide, but when she realized that her husband would not be there, she did not eat her own meal. Why she would not have just throw everyone's food into the trash is not something that this hypothesis explains, and I would happily jettison it in light of new information.
My conjecture is that she was planning a murder-suicide, but when she realized that her husband would not be there, she did not eat her own meal. Why she would not have just throw everyone's food into the trash is not something that this hypothesis explains, and I would happily jettison it in light of new information.
The trial has started.
www.theguardian.com
I’m in Eastern Europe now, and it is featuring in the news!
Anyway, the prosecution has withdrawn the attempted murder charges. That’s understandable. Even though, if convicted of murder, she would then be guilty of attempted murder, it would not likely increase her sentence.
Anyway, no surprises at all so far, and I doubt there will be. She certainly will not give evidence, and I can’t see how the facts which led to her arrest will be refuted.
Erin Patterson concocted cancer diagnosis to ensure children missed fatal mushroom lunch, murder trial hears
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 South Gippsland in 2023
www.theguardian.com
I’m in Eastern Europe now, and it is featuring in the news!
Anyway, the prosecution has withdrawn the attempted murder charges. That’s understandable. Even though, if convicted of murder, she would then be guilty of attempted murder, it would not likely increase her sentence.
Anyway, no surprises at all so far, and I doubt there will be. She certainly will not give evidence, and I can’t see how the facts which led to her arrest will be refuted.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
She has testified in her defence. That's highly unusual. The prosecution is going to have fun.
I heard she very generously offered to cater for the prosecution's team and the jury's meals.
I am astounded. I don’t think the defence has any cards to play, so this is their Hail Mary pass.
Why is that unusual? Surely the accused would want to testify in their defence in many cases?
I presume you mean as a defence witness rather than as the accused?
In Australia it is very rare. After all, the defence doesn’t have to prove anything, and the accused is usually an awkward, inexpert and unconvincing witness.
jeremyp
Philosopher
It's all very well testifying in your own defence, but it gives the prosecution the opportunity to cross examine you.
Can't they question you anyway?
You can probably work out that I don't have much knowledge of court systems. But surely the prosecution can at least question the defendant.
I would suspect with the Australia legal system being based on the English system you have a right to silence as we have in the UK.
I naively assumed many people would decide to present their account. But I guess that's where the defence barrister comes in
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Many people would like to testify in their defence but their defence barrister usually convinces them to not testify.
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
Because it's usually not a good idea. Most defendants are, in fact, guilty. And often think they are smarter than the police or the prosecutors who can now cross-examine them. They aren't.
jeremyp
Philosopher
No. If you don't take the stand, you can't be questioned.
jeremyp
Philosopher
Even if you are innocent, a skilled prosecutor might be able to manipulate you into looking untrustworthy or unsympathetic from the jury's point of view.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Most court proceedings I see, when the accused insists on presenting their account, the first thing they do is admit to the crime, on the record, in front of the prosecutor, immediately after being told that anything they say can and will be used against them in court.
The usual train of thought seems to be that they have in mind some extenuating circumstance that will transform their factual guilt into a gracious dismissal of the charges, if they can but articulate it in front of the judge.
These scenes very often lead to a mad scramble of defense, prosecution, and judge all rushing to tell the defendant to shut the hell up before he makes things even worse for himself.
The most hilarious variation is when the defendant is trying to take a plea deal, but desperately wants the judge to know that even though he's pleading guilty, he didn't actually do it. This results in immediate rejection of the plea deal, and a trial date being set for the defendant.
The usual train of thought seems to be that they have in mind some extenuating circumstance that will transform their factual guilt into a gracious dismissal of the charges, if they can but articulate it in front of the judge.
These scenes very often lead to a mad scramble of defense, prosecution, and judge all rushing to tell the defendant to shut the hell up before he makes things even worse for himself.
The most hilarious variation is when the defendant is trying to take a plea deal, but desperately wants the judge to know that even though he's pleading guilty, he didn't actually do it. This results in immediate rejection of the plea deal, and a trial date being set for the defendant.
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
The police probably questioned the defendant before they were charged. If done correctly there should be nothing else for the defendant to say.
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
The alternative was McDonalds. I'd take my chances with her.
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,561
NPR reported, "Prosecutors say the patients were not immediately given the antidote because there was a lack of evidence to confirm that's what they had ingested, and their conditions deteriorated over the following days even as they were treated. Doctors concluded that the illness was "unsurvivable" for Heather Wilkinson, Donald Patterson and Gail Patterson." The AGE reported, "The pharmacist told Morgan there wasn’t enough antidote for four patients but said they would obtain it from another hospital." This does not bear on the question of innocence or guilt, but it does raise a question or two.