• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mushroom killer arrested

theprestige said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'm a massive fan of the videos of arraignment hearings where the judge reads the charges, asks the defendant if they understand them, and then the defendant, to the horror of their counsel, proceeds to say something along the lines of "I don't understand. I threatened him with a knife and stole his wallet, but..."
 
malbui said:
I'm a massive fan of the videos of arraignment hearings where the judge reads the charges, asks the defendant if they understand them, and then the defendant, to the horror of their counsel, proceeds to say something along the lines of "I don't understand. I threatened him with a knife and stole his wallet, but..."
Click to expand...
Right? Or the, "I'm taking the plea to get a lesser charge, but your honor should know I didn't do it..."
 
Chris_Halkides said:
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.
Click to expand...
There is no specific 'antidote' to Arminata poisoning, the closest is Silibinin and that's still experimental. Supportive treatment is possible and generally reduces mortality from ~70% to around ~25%.
a_unique_person said:
They wouldn't expect deliberate poisoning.
Click to expand...
But accidental poisoning is possible.
 
catsmate said:
There is no specific 'antidote' to Arminata poisoning, the closest is Silibinin and that's still experimental. Supportive treatment is possible and generally reduces mortality from ~70% to around ~25%.

But accidental poisoning is possible.
Click to expand...
True. The person who cooked the meal could have helped and provided some useful information.
 
The questions surrounding treatment are relevant, in the sense that (assuming that she is guilty), she might have given more information sooner, leading to faster treatment. There is a 1999 report on using N-acetylcysteine, in order to reduce liver damage, but another report was negative. There are also reports from 2023 on a possible antidote. "The paper says that the enzyme STT3B is required for alpha-amanitin toxicity which can be blocked by the chemical indocyanine green (ICG), a possible antidote for A. phalloides poisoning."
 
Last edited:
This explains a lot. Is her defence counsel trying to help get her convicted? They thought it could be mushrooms so she tells them the mushrooms were bought at the supermarket.

“We had a very brief conversation. I remember him asking to confirm if I was the cook. I thought he asked me where the ingredients in the [beef] Wellington came from. Did I make them or buy them premade, and where did the stuff come from,” she told the court.

Patterson responded that she’d bought the ingredients from Woolworths, and asked why he was inquiring. She told the court that he said: “We’re concerned you’ve been exposed to death cap mushrooms.”

Patterson said she was shocked and confused.

“I was just expecting to come in for saline for gastro.

“I didn’t see how death cap mushrooms could be in the meal, and the information that I had was that I had diarrhoea, Don and Gail had been a bit unwell, but that’s all I knew.
Click to expand...
www.theage.com.au

Erin Patterson murder trial day 26 as it happened: Mushroom cook says fear of estranged husband’s actions led to phone resets; details dumping food dehydrator at local tip after fatal lunch

Erin Patterson has told a court her estranged husband asked her if she had used a dehydrator to poison his parents, and admitted resetting her phone out of fear police would discover photos she had of foraged mushrooms.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au
 
Last edited:
Patterson is still insisting that the death cap mushrooms came from Woolworths, Australia’s largest supermarket chain. I just don’t get why she has been advised to say this. Firstly police have found no trace of deadly mushrooms from the suppliers to Woolworths and secondly there has been no mass poisoning which would be expected from a contaminated batch.

There’s not much chance of a not guilty verdict in my view.
 
lionking said:
Patterson is still insisting that the death cap mushrooms came from Woolworths, Australia’s largest supermarket chain. I just don’t get why she has been advised to say this. Firstly police have found no trace of deadly mushrooms from the suppliers to Woolworths and secondly there has been no mass poisoning which would be expected from a contaminated batch.

There’s not much chance of a not guilty verdict in my view.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more.

As far as I can see, from what has hit the press.

1. She researched poisoning online.
2. She visited a website that gave the location of death cap mushrooms.
3. She visited the location of death cap mushrooms.
4. She bought a food dehydrator.
5. She dried and powdered some mushrooms with the dehydrator.
6. She served a meal where her plate was a different colour to the rest.

And most tellingly:

7. She has lied about all of the above and been caught in those lies.

I'll be very disappointed with the jury if they don't find her guilty.
 
catsmate said:
There is no specific 'antidote' to Arminata poisoning, the closest is Silibinin and that's still experimental. Supportive treatment is possible and generally reduces mortality from ~70% to around ~25%.

But accidental poisoning is possible.
Click to expand...
Amanita?
 
Last edited:
I am amazed she made so many mistakes. If she had said "I found these mushrooms and decided to cook them. What do you mean some types are poisonous?" She might have gotten away with it.
If you did any research, make sure you delete your internet history later. Then do not do anything for a few months. If you buy anything make sure it is for something else.

But then first time a person does something they are likely to mess it up.
 
rjh01 said:
I am amazed she made so many mistakes. If she had said "I found these mushrooms and decided to cook them. What do you mean some types are poisonous?" She might have gotten away with it.
If you did any research, make sure you delete your internet history later. Then do not do anything for a few months. If you buy anything make sure it is for something else.

But then first time a person does something they are likely to mess it up.
Click to expand...
Her husband could have been poisoned previously. So this could be regarded as a success.
 
Last edited:
I am no longer as certain of the result of this trial. For two reasons, Firstly, despite precedent anout murder trials being conducted in Melbourne, this one was in Morwell. Near where there defendant lived, because she needed local support. Utter ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. There only needs to be one juror, who may have some sympathy for or acquaintance with Patterson to find reasonable doubt.

Also the judge’s directions seemed to support the defence. Next week will be the decision
 
lionking said:
I am no longer as certain of the result of this trial. For two reasons, Firstly, despite precedent anout murder trials being conducted in Melbourne, this one was in Morwell. Near where there defendant lived, because she needed local support. Utter ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. There only needs to be one juror, who may have some sympathy for or acquaintance with Patterson to find reasonable doubt.

Also the judge’s directions seemed to support the defence. Next week will be the decision
Click to expand...
He has to direct the jury to make a decision based on the law. Otherwise it will be grounds for appeal. The persecution can say what it wants within rules but that doesn't mean everything they said can be used to make the judgement of guilt.
 
The Luke Mitchell case (which has its own thread) alone would make me doubtful of the benefits of non-unanimous verdicts. Anecdotally, I can name more guilty than innocent verdicts which made me ask, "What was the jury thinking?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom