Erin Patterson, who allegedly murdered her in-laws by serving them a lunch laced with death cap mushrooms, will defend the charges by claiming the poisoning was accidental, a Victorian court has heard.
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.
Patterson has pleaded not guilty to murdering or attempting to murder the relatives of her estranged husband, Simon Patterson.
She is accused of murdering Simon’s parents, Don and Gail Patterson, his aunt Heather Wilkinson, and attempting to murder Ian Wilkinson, Simon’s uncle and Heather’s husband.
Simon was also invited to the lunch at Leongatha on 29 July 2023.
Patterson served individual beef wellingtons to her lunch guests, three of whom died from death cap mushroom poisoning, the court has heard. Patterson has denied deliberately poisoning them.
Justice Christopher Beale told the jury on Wednesday morning that his understanding of Patterson’s defence was that she had not meant to poison her guests.
Beale was running through a “murder checklist”, which has been provided to the jury in order for them to understand the questions of law that must be considered in order for them to reach a verdict.
“As I understand it, the accused defence’s [is]… she didn’t deliberately serve up a poison meal, that happened accidentally,” Beale said.
Patterson was crying as Beale spoke to the jury.
Nanette Rogers SC, the prosecutor, said in her opening submissions in the case that Patterson had invited Simon and his relatives to her house to discuss “medical issues” she had, and how to break the news to her and Simon’s two children.
She invited the group to her lunch during a service at the Korumburra baptist church, where Ian was the pastor, on 16 July, 2023.
The night before the lunch, Simon texted Patterson that he “felt uncomfortable” attending, but that he would be happy to discuss her health with her another time.
Rogers said Patterson responded five minutes later saying she was disappointed, and emphasising the effort she had put into the lunch, which was a “special meal” of the kind she may not be able to have for “some time”.
The Wilkinsons had been puzzled about the lunch invite, Rogers said, as they had never visit Patterson’s home before.
When they arrived, they were shown around the property, before being taken into the dining area.
Rogers showed a photo of the dining table, which had six seats and ran parallel to a kitchen island bench, to the jury during her opening.
Patterson served individual beef wellingtons consisting of a piece of steak, covered in mushrooms, and encased in pastry, with mashed potato and green beans, on four large grey plates to her guests.
Her meal was served on a smaller, lighter coloured plate, Rogers said.
They said grace, and started the meal. The Wilkinsons ate their meal, with Gail finishing half of hers and Don eating all his, and the rest of Gail’s, Rogers said.
After the meal, Patterson announced she had cancer, and asked whether she should tell the children. Patterson had earlier discussed with Gail that she had a biopsy and other tests taken regarding a lump she had found on her elbow.
The group agreed she should be honest with them, and they prayed together about Patterson telling the children, Rogers said.
All the lunch guests started to fall unwell about 11 or 12 hours later, Rogers said, before being transferred to local hospitals and then to intensive care at hospitals in Melbourne.
Rogers said Patterson had an amicable relationship with her husband, despite their 2015 separation, until November 2022. Simon had maintained hope that the couple would reconcile, Rogers said.
She said at that time Patterson asked why Simon had referred to himself as “separated” on his tax return, and although he said he was willing to amend it she said she would instead be seeking child support payments.
About four weeks before the lunch, Patterson invited Simon and his parents, Don and Gail, to lunch.
Simon texted to say he could not come, and the lunch passed without incident.
Rogers’ opening submission continues.
Patterson’s lawyer, Colin Mandy SC, will make his opening submission when Rogers concludes.
Beale said in his instructions to the jury on Tuesday that Patterson was no longer accused of attempting to murder her estranged husband.
He told the jury those charges had been discontinued, and that they should remove any consideration of these previous charges.
Beale said during the empanelment that he expected most of the jury pool would have known about the Patterson case.
“Over the last 20 months, there have been many newspaper and magazine articles about this case, there’s been extensive radio and television coverage, there’s been online commentary and podcasts.
“All of these have been freely available to the public and may have come to your attention. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that most of you, if not all, will have some prior information about this case.
“It is unrealistic to expect that the jurors selected can erase that prior information from their minds but it will be their task to bring an open mind to their consideration of the evidence and decide the case solely on the evidence that is led in this trial, not on any prior or outside information.”
The panel is made up of 10 men and five women. Three of them are reserve jurors, with only 12 deciding on a verdict. The verdict must be unanimous.
He said that in order for Patterson to be found guilty of murder the prosecution had to prove four elements beyond reasonable doubt: that Patterson caused the death of the alleged victim, that she did so consciously, voluntarily and deliberately, that she did so intending to kill, or to cause really serious injury, and that she did so without any lawful justification or excuse.
The trial in Morwell continues.
