Erin Patterson continues giving evidence on mushrooms in Supreme Court murder trial

Australia Broadcast Center

11-06-2025

Erin Patterson has rejected a suggestion from prosecutors that she lied about feeding her children leftover meat from a deadly beef Wellington lunch, while giving evidence for a seventh day in her triple-murder trial.
The 50-year-old has pleaded not guilty to charges of murder and attempted murder after three relatives — her parents-in-law Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson — died from death cap mushroom poisoning following a lunch at her house on July 29, 2023.
Another relative, Heather's husband Ian Wilkinson, fell seriously ill but survived.
The trial of Erin Patterson, who stands accused of using a poisoned meal to murder three relatives, continues.
Follow along with Wednesday's hearing in our live blog.
To stay up to date with this story, subscribe to ABC News.
On Wednesday, Ms Patterson told a Supreme Court jury in Morwell she fed her children leftovers from the deadly lunch the following night, but had scraped the mushroom paste off the meat.
Previously in the trial, Ms Patterson told the court she had experienced nausea and diarrhoea on Saturday and Sunday after eating the beef Wellington lunch.
Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC put it to Ms Patterson that she was effectively saying that she fed her children leftovers from Saturday's lunch on Sunday even though she had been experiencing diarrhoea in the aftermath of the lunch.
"It was the same lunch, yes," Ms Patterson said.
Ms Patterson also confirmed that she knew her in-laws had fallen ill following the lunch and before she served the beef Wellington leftovers to her children.
"Why did you proceed to feed the same meal to your children when you knew, or suspected, that the meal that you'd served had made them ill?" Dr Rogers asked.
"I didn't know or suspect that," Ms Patterson responded.
Ms Patterson agreed that on the Monday after the lunch, she initially asked the hospital if it was "really necessary" to bring her children to hospital given they had no symptoms and she did not think they'd eaten any leftover mushrooms.
Dr Rogers put to her that it was not credible that "if you thought, genuinely, that your children had eaten a potentially fatal poison … you'd be worried or stressed about pulling them out of school".
"The issue was mushrooms and they had not eaten the mushrooms," Ms Patterson responded.
"I suggest that you would have wanted them to have immediate medical attention, notwithstanding on your claim that they hadn't eaten the mushrooms," Dr Rogers said.
"I wanted to understand the concern and the risk to them," Ms Patterson said.
The prosecutor suggested that Ms Patterson was "initially reluctant" to have her children assessed because she knew they had not eaten leftovers from the contaminated lunch and their lives were not at risk.
"Incorrect," Ms Patterson said.
Earlier, Ms Patterson maintained she bought dried mushrooms which she believed ended up in the deadly lunch from an Asian grocer in Melbourne's south-east.
The prosecution has called that claim a "deliberate lie" and accused Ms Patterson of coming up with the story the Monday after the lunch, when she was asked by doctors about the ingredients in the meal.
Ms Patterson said that was incorrect.
The court previously heard Ms Patterson told a health official she thought the mushrooms had smelled funny after purchasing them and she had initially avoided using them.
Dr Rogers put to Ms Patterson that "if they were overpowering, surely you would have been worried" about putting them in the beef Wellington.
"No, I didn't think that. I thought it was the perfect dish for them," Ms Patterson responded.
Ms Patterson said she had dried the mushrooms further in her dehydrator before storing them for several months.
The prosecution went into detail about conversations Ms Patterson had with health official Sally Ann Atkinson, who was investigating the death cap poisonings following the lunch.
The court has heard Ms Patterson told Ms Atkinson that she believed she had bought dried mushrooms at an Asian grocer in the Oakleigh area and that they had been packaged with a handwritten label.
Previously in the trial, a police interview was aired to the court where Ms Patterson told authorities she had been "very, very helpful" to the health department.
On Wednesday, the prosecution took aim at this assertion in court.
"You sent [the health department] on a wild goose chase trying to locate this Asian grocer … you did not want to be pressed for details about the Asian grocery store," Dr Rogers said.
"You lied about the source of the death cap mushrooms because you knew you were guilty of deliberately poisoning your four [relatives]."
Ms Patterson rejected the assertions.
Earlier in the trial, the court heard from Troy Schonknecht, an environmental health officer with the City of Monash Council, who searched for an Asian grocer alleged to have sold deadly mushrooms.
Mr Schonknecht investigated more than a dozen Asian grocers, but found only one store selling mushrooms with their own packaging.
He was unable to find death cap mushrooms fitting the direct description given by Ms Patterson.
Ms Patterson last week told the court she now believed foraged mushrooms had been included in the meal alongside the mushrooms she said she bought from an Asian grocer.
The prosecution also raised the testimony of telecommunications expert Matthew Sorrel, who provided context for mobile phone tower data recorded on May 22, 2023.
The prosecutor put to Ms Patterson that mobile data suggested she went to the Loch township on that morning.
"It looks like I did do that, yes," Ms Patterson said.
But she disagreed that she went to Loch with the purpose of finding death cap mushrooms at the location previously uploaded to the iNaturalist site.
On the same day, expert analysis of mobile phone data suggested Ms Patterson's phone was in the Outtrim area just before midday.
Dr Rogers suggested she went to Neilson Street, where fungi expert Tom May had flagged death cap mushrooms in an iNaturalist pin published the day before.
But Ms Patterson said she had no recollection of travelling to Outtrim as a destination, but it was possible she passed through.
"That is possible because you can pass through Outtrim on the way to Wonthaggi or Phillip Island, I think it is," she said.
The trial continues.