Guilty verdict in mushroom murder trial: What happens if there's an appeal?
Erin Patterson arriving in the back of a prison transport vehicle at Latrobe Valley Magistrate's Court in Morwell, Australia.
Photo:
AFP / MARTIN KEEP
After a marathon trial involving more than 50 witnesses, Erin Patterson has been found guilty by a jury of murdering three relatives by lacing their meals with death cap mushrooms.
The high-profile case has captured a global audience, with seats at Morwell's Latrobe Valley Law Courts in regional Victoria filling each day for more than two months.
After about a week of deliberations, a Supreme Court jury on Monday delivered its verdict, finding the 50-year-old guilty of murdering Don and Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson.
It also found her guilty of the attempted murder of Ian Wilkinson, the only surviving guest of the lunch.
But the case's time in the courts may not be over, with the possibility Patterson could appeal the decision.
Patterson will have 28 days from the date of her sentence to begin the process of lodging an appeal, according to the Supreme Court of Victoria.
Her legal team can appeal either the guilty verdict itself, the sentence handed down or both of those things together.
Outside of this window, convicted people must file for an extension of time which may or may not be accepted by the courts.
University of Newcastle criminology researcher Xanthe Mallett said the prosecution would also have the opportunity to appeal a sentence once that had been handed down.
"If in cases where the sentence is considered to be too lenient, the prosecution can appeal that - the severity of the sentence, but they can't appeal a not-guilty verdict," she said.
Erin Patterson was found guilty on three counts of murder and one of attempted murder today.
Photo:
ABC News
There are a number of grounds the defence can appeal on.
High-profile barrister Robert Richter KC said the most common ground was that the verdict was unsatisfactory and unreasonable.
"The Court of Appeal might find that it isn't sufficient to justify a conviction," he said.
"But that on its own is a very difficult ground to get home, because it sort of does not usurp the function of the jury, but what it does is it looks at what a jury ought to have concluded or should have concluded."
Richter said if any of the directions given to the jury had misstated the law, it could be grounds for an appeal, but noted the judge presiding over the high-profile case had been "very careful".
Mallett said the defence would need to demonstrate that there was some error of law or some problem that was sufficient to be granted grounds of appeal.
"Every case is obviously unique," Mallett said.
"If [the defence] appeal ... or want to appeal, they would look at every part of the case, looking for anything that they felt was a legal justification."
If an application to appeal is granted, the matter will go before the Court of Appeal but it could take months before a court date is set.
Richter said if the appeal succeeded in front of a panel of three judges in the Court of Appeal, there were two possibilities.
"One is to say the evidence was not sufficient to produce a verdict beyond reasonable doubt," he said.
"Or alternatively there have been errors and so the verdict has to be quashed."
If the verdict is quashed a retrial could be ordered.
If an application for leave to appeal is rejected in the first instance by the Court of Appeal, relevant parties could apply for leave to appeal in the High Court.
"That requires demonstrating particular problems that have a special application in the criminal law that the High Court would accept as important enough to give leave to appeal," Richter said.
"But the percentage of cases that get special leave to appeal in criminal matters is very, very low."
If leave to appeal is not granted, the verdict or sentence stands and the matter does not continue further.
- ABC
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

1News
an hour ago
- 1News
Leftovers, CCTV and a dehydrator: The evidence that helped convict Erin Patterson
For nearly two years, the public has only heard pieces of the story behind one of Australia's most shocking murder cases. But now, following Erin Patterson's conviction for three counts of murder and one of attempted murder, the full picture is finally coming into focus. The Victorian mother of two was found guilty of deliberately serving a beef Wellington laced with death cap mushrooms to four members of her extended family, killing three and leaving the fourth fighting for his life. Now, evidence previously suppressed can be made public, including photos of the beef Wellington itself, the moment Patterson handed over a phone to police and CCTV showing her at hospital following the fatal lunch. The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including what the jury saw at the mushroom murder trial, where house prices are climbing, and why YouTube's biggest star has business plans in NZ. (Source: 1News) A meal that killed three ADVERTISEMENT Released images include the first photo of the meal served at the centre of the case: the home-cooked beef Wellington Erin Patterson made for her in-laws on July 29, 2023. Three of them - Don and Gail Patterson and Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson - died within days. Pastor Ian Wilkinson survived, but only after a liver transplant. Other pieces of evidence included CCTV of Patterson walking through hospital corridors the day after the meal reportedly seeking treatment, as well as images of the food dehydrator prosecutors said was used to prepare the toxic mushrooms which was found dumped at a local tip. Police found the Sunbeam food dehydrator at the tip days after the lunch. (Source: Supreme Court of Victoria) Also released were police photos showing Patterson handing over a phone during a search - a device investigators said had been reset multiple times, including remotely when it was in police custody. The prosecution said it was not her primary phone. The jury were also shown maps, witness statements, forensic reports and digital search history - including searches for deadly mushrooms, cooking techniques, and foraging websites. Erin Patterson passes her phone to police during a search of her home in August 2023. (Source: Supreme Court of Victoria) A case built on 'deception' ADVERTISEMENT While the defence claimed the Crown relied on circumstantial evidence, Nanette Rogers told jurors it was Patterson's pattern of deception that revealed her intent. Prosecutors highlighted four key lies: Claiming to have cancer to lure her in-laws to the lunch Changing stories about the mushroom source citing multiple grocers and suburbs Denying she owned a food dehydrator later found to contain death cap DNA Providing police with a secondary phone and the wrong mobile number The jury was ultimately convinced beyond reasonable doubt that these were not accidents, but deliberate attempts to cover up a planned poisoning. CCTV showing Patterson dumping a dehydrator at Koonawarra waste station (Source: Nine) Fresh revelations Patterson allegedly tampered with prison food Although the trial has ended, Patterson's legal saga may not be over. ADVERTISEMENT Multiple Australian media outlets are reporting fresh allegations from inside prison, where Patterson is being held on remand. She's been accused of tampering with food that allegedly made another inmate sick. Patterson was "thrown in the slot" (prison isolation) after a fellow inmate claimed she fell ill after eating food Patterson may have handled. While no formal charges had been laid, prison authorities have confirmed an internal investigation is underway. Victoria's Department of Justice said it does not comment on individual prisoners but later confirmed there was "no evidence to support that there has been any contaminated food or suspected poisonings at Dame Phyllis Frost Centre". Erin Patterson inside Leongatha Hospital in Melbourne (Source: Nine) The fresh claims come the day after her conviction. Patterson's defence team denied any wrongdoing and described the accusation as "baseless". Reporting on the alleged incident was previously restricted while Patterson's trial was ongoing. 'Large sentence' awaits triple-murderer ADVERTISEMENT The focus now shifts to her sentencing. Under Victorian law, each count of murder carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and the attempted murder charge can result in up to 25 years in prison. While the court has not yet scheduled a sentencing date, it is anticipated that a separate hearing will be held where both the prosecution and defence will present arguments regarding the appropriate sentence. 1News Australia correspondent Aziz Al Sa'afin speaks to Breakfast in the wake of yesterday's verdict. (Source: Breakfast) The judge will consider factors such as the severity of the crime, any mitigating circumstances and the impact on the victims' families before delivering the final sentence. Given the gravity of the offences and the extensive evidence presented during the trial, Patterson faces the possibility of spending the remainder of her life in prison. Patterson's legal team has not yet indicated whether they will appeal the verdict.

RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
First night of Erin Patterson's prison term
crime world 8:52 am today Last night was the first night of Erin Patterson's prison term after having been found guilty of the murders of three relatives and the attempted murder of another after serving them a meal with deadly mushrooms. ABC correspondent Steph Ferrier spoke to Ingrid Hipkiss


NZ Herald
5 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Court reveals complex portrait of Erin Patterson after mushroom murders verdict
A devoted mother, a generous in-law and a callous killer – court testimony reveals details about Erin Patterson's life. Over the course of a weeks-long murder trial, Erin Patterson was described as many things; a multimillionaire and generous in-law, a devoted mother-of-two and a cold-blooded killer. The unassuming Victorian woman