Recap: what the jury heard today
Here’s a recap of what the jury heard today:
1. Under cross-examination, Erin Patterson denied deliberately foraging death cap mushrooms, placing them in a beef wellington she served her guests and weighing them to calculate the fatal dose for a person.
2. Patterson denied telling her lunch guest she had been diagnosed with cancer. Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC said she told her lunch guests she had cancer. Patterson replied: “I don’t agree.” Earlier, she said she thought she talked about “undergoing some testing” at lunch.
3. Patterson said she lied to police about dehydrating mushrooms and food because she was “afraid” of being “held responsible.”
4. Patterson was cross-examined on correspondence with her mother-in-law, Gail Patterson, in the lead up to the lunch about medical appointments that did not occur. During the questioning by Rogers, Patterson acknowledged she lied about appointments, including for a needle biopsy.
5. Justice Christopher Beale told the jury the timeline of the trial - initially scheduled for up to six weeks - had blown out by at least a fortnight.
Updated
Court adjourns
The court has adjourned for the day.
Patterson’s cross-examination will continue from 10.30am tomorrow.
Updated
Patterson is asked about group chat on financial arrangements for children
Rogers takes Patterson to a group chat she had with Simon and his parents, Don and Gail. The messages from December 2022 are on the app Signal.
In the messages, the group are discussing financial arrangements for their children, including their school fees.
Rogers says Patterson was seeking support from Don and Gail to get Simon to pay some of their children’s school fees. Patterson rejects this.
She says she thought that Simon’s behaviour might change if he knew his parents were aware of it.
Updated
Patterson asked about relationship with estranged husband
Rogers turns to question Patterson about her relationship with her estranged husband, Simon.
She says Simon gave evidence in the trial that he noticed a change in their relationship when Patterson discovered he had listed himself as “separated” in his tax return in late 2022.
Patterson says there was a change but it “happened a bit later, a few weeks later”. She says the tax return conversation was in October 2022.
“But I didn’t perceive a change in the relationship until the end of November,” she says.
Rogers says: “I suggest you never thought you would have to account for this lie about having cancer because you thought your lunch guests would die.”
“That’s not true,” Patterson replies.
Patterson asked about reason for lunch invitation
Rogers takes Patterson to evidence by child protection worker, Katrina Cripps, that Patterson told her she invited her lunch guests over for advice about approaching a medical issue with her children on 1 August 2023.
Patterson says she “wouldn’t have put it like that because that wasn’t the reason I invited people”.
“Cripps is wrong, is she?” Rogers asks.
“Yes,” Patterson says.
Patterson says she told Cripps a medical issue had been discussed at the lunch. But she says she did not tell her a discussion of a medical issue was the reason for the lunch.
Rogers says Ian Wilkinson’s evidence was that Patterson told her guests she was anxious about sharing her medical news with her children.
She asks if Patterson told her lunch guests she was anxious about telling her children.
“I think it’s more accurate that I had been talking to them about how to manage the children,” Patterson says.
Updated
Patterson quizzed on ovarian cancer
Rogers says Patterson wanted her lunch guests to believe she would be having cancer treatment.
“Yeah, I agree with that,” Patterson says.
Rogers says she told her lunch guests she had a cancer diagnosis.
“I don’t agree,” Patterson says.
Rogers says Simon gave evidence he saw Don and Gail at Korumburra hospital the day after the lunch - 30 July 2023. Simon said Don recalled that at the lunch Erin told her guests she had undergone medical tests and ovarian cancer had been detected. Simon said Don told him Erin was not sure how to tell her children.
“I don’t remember saying I’d had a diagnosis,” Patterson says.
Patterson says she did not tell her guests she was unsure how to tell her children.
Updated
Patterson pressed on what she told lunch guests
Rogers presses Patterson on her evidence that she did not tell her lunch guests she had a cancer diagnosis.
Rogers takes Patterson to evidence she gave yesterday, when she said:
I mentioned I’d had an issue a year or two earlier when I thought I had ovarian cancer ...
Then – I’m not proud of this – but I led them to believe that I might be needing some treatment in regards to that in the next few weeks or months.
Patterson says she remembers giving this evidence.
Asked if she agrees she told her lunch guests she had upcoming treatment for cancer, Patterson says: “I can’t remember the exact words I used.”
“I was trying to communicate that there might be some treatment coming up,” Patterson says.
Updated
Patterson denies telling lunch guests she had ovarian cancer
Rogers asks Patterson about Ian Wilkinson’s evidence that she told her lunch guests she had cancer.
“Did you announce at the lunch you had cancer? Rogers asks.
“I didn’t say that I had received a diagnosis,” Patterson says.
Rogers repeats the question.
“Isn’t that what … diagnosed means?” Patterson says.
Rogers asks the questions again. “Did you tell people at the lunch you had cancer?” she asks.
“No,” says Patterson. She says she cannot remember the precise words she used. She says:
What I was trying to communicate was that, that I was undergoing investigations about ovarian cancer and might need treatment ... in the future.
Rogers asks Patterson again if she told the lunch guests she had cancer.
“I did not,” Patterson says.
Rogers says Ian’s evidence was that she mentioned a diagnostic test at the lunch.
Patterson says: “I think I talked about that I had been undergoing some testing.”
Rogers says Ian recalled Patterson mentioning a spot on a scan.
Patterson says she doesn’t think she said that.
Updated
Patterson asked about July 2023 message exchange
A message exchange, previously shown to the court, from July 2023 is shown.
Gail asks Patterson how her medical appointment went the day prior. The message was sent on 6 July 2023. The following day, Patterson replied and said there was a “bit to digest with everything that’s come out of it. I might talk more about it with you both when I see you in person.”
Rogers says: “You pretended to Gail Patterson that you were ill with a potentially fatal disease.”
“I don’t know if I’d say fatal but serious,” Patterson says.
Rogers asks if Patterson hoped this information would be passed on to Simon.
“No, I would expect her not to,” Patterson says.
Rogers says Patterson’s lunch invite to Gail and Heather was made nine days later on 16 July 2023. Patterson agrees.
Rogers says Patterson wrote “see you in person” before she had invited her relatives to lunch.
Rogers asks:
When you sent these messages to Gail were you planning to have the lunch on 29 July? Was that in the back of your mind?
“No, I don’t think it was,” Patterson says.
Updated
Patterson asked about lies in messages about medical appointments
A text message from Gail to Patterson on the same day is shown to the court. It said:
Hi Erin. Just wondering how you got on at your appointment today? Love Gail and Don.
Patterson replied the next day - 29 June 2023 - and said the appointment “went ok”. She also said she had a needle biopsy of the lump and would return for an MRI the following week.
Patterson agrees this was a lie.
“I didn’t have an appointment and I didn’t have a needle biopsy,” she says.
She agrees she also did not have a scheduled MRI appointment.
Rogers asks if Patterson anticipated Gail would convey the information about her medical appointments to Simon.
“The answer to that is no because I wouldn’t expect her to tell him any of that,” Patterson says.
Updated
Patterson admits she had no ‘legitimate’ medical issue to discuss at fateful lunch
Rogers shows the court a diary entry from Gail Patterson on 28 June 2023. The entry reads “Erin - St Vincent’s arm lump.”
Patterson agrees it was a reference to her.
Rogers says she told Gail prior to 28 June 2023 that she had a lump in her elbow and needed to go to St Vincent’s on this date for an appointment.
“You did not have a lump in your elbow on 28 June 2023,” Rogers says.
“That’s true,” Patterson replies.
“You did not have an appointment at St Vincent’s on 28 June 2023,” Rogers says.
“No, I didn’t,” Patterson says.
Rogers says Patterson had no medical issues to discuss at the lunch.
“I didn’t have a legitimate medical reason. That’s true,” Patterson replies.
Patterson is asked why she accessed cancer information
Rogers puts to Patterson: “I suggest you accessed these images of information about cancer in May 2023.”
“I don’t think I did,” Patterson says. “It was something I was quite worried about in late ‘21, early ‘22.”
Rogers says:
I suggest you used this information from the internet for the purpose of educating yourself on ovarian and brain cancer symptoms. Agree or disagree?
“I think I did do that at one point,” Patterson replies. She says she did this in 2021 and a period going into early 2022. Patterson denies she used this information to tell a more convincing lie about cancer.
Rogers asks why she did it.
Patterson says:
I was concerned I had ovarian cancer. I was concerned I had something wrong with my brain.
Rogers says Patterson used the cancer information to allow her to have a reason for inviting her lunch guests. Patterson says:
I didn’t use any reason when I invited them. I just invited them.
Updated
Patterson asked about screenshots of cancer information
Rogers takes Patterson to photos, modified in May 2023, that were found on a Samsung tablet police seized from Patterson’s house.
One photo includes text about ovarian cancer. Rogers says the text in the screenshot outlines what happens to the brain of someone with ovarian cancer.
“I suggest you conducted an internet search on this topic,” Rogers says. Patterson agrees.
Patterson says she doesn’t know if she took a screenshot of this.
Another photo shows text about “stage four ovarian cancer”.
Rogers suggests this was an internet search conducted by Patterson. She agrees. Patterson says she doesn’t know if it was a screenshot of this search.
Another photo shows text about brain lymphoma. Patterson says she also does not know if this image is a screenshot.
Patterson is asked about Facebook message with emoji
Rogers takes Patterson to a Facebook message she sent in a group chat on 6 December 2022.
In the message, Patterson said her in-laws were refusing to adjudicate in a dispute between her and Simon over child support payments.
She also wrote: “This family I swear to fucking god.”
Rogers says Patterson used the “eye roll emoji” after she wrote that Don and Gail’s advice was that Patterson and Simon should pray together.
She takes her to another message and says Patterson has used the “eye rolling emoji”.
Patterson says it is just an emoji with a “straight mouth”. She says: “I don’t know what I’d call it.”
Rogers says Patterson was “mocking” Don and Gail’s advice, including their suggestion that the couple should pray for their children.
Patterson says she was frustrated.
Updated
Patterson asked about religious views
Rogers takes Patterson to her prior evidence that she is a Christian.
She says Patterson’s Facebook friend Christine Hunt told the trial the accused said she was an atheist and struggled with Simon coming from a religious background.
Patterson says she did not feel close to Hunt. She says she did not share “anything personal” in the Facebook group chat with Hunt after 2021.
Patterson denies messaging in the group chat that she was an atheist.
“I suggest that’s an untruth,” says Rogers.
Patterson says she did not post this.
Patterson asked about ‘mushrooming’ and ‘foraging’
Rogers says Patterson lied to Stuart at Monash Health when she said she did not go “mushrooming”. Patterson says she would have asked Stuart what she meant by the phrase. She says it is not a phrase she would have used.
She says “mushrooming” could mean a couple of things, including “foraging” and “other uses of mushrooms” that are not eating.
Under questioning by Rogers, Patterson says she uses the word “foraging” to refer to picking and eating.
Patterson denies she deliberately used foraged mushrooms in the beef wellington meal on 29 July 2023.
She says she did not deliberately put death cap mushrooms in the lunch meal.
Updated
Court resumes
The jurors have returned to the courtroom in Morwell.
Court adjourns
The court has adjourned for a lunch break.
Patterson’s cross-examination will resume from 2.15pm.
Updated
Patterson is asked about conversation with doctor about ‘mushrooming’
Rogers says Prof Rhonda Stuart, a doctor at Monash Health, testified that she had asked Patterson while she was in hospital in the days after the lunch if she had been “mushrooming”. She also asked Patterson if she used any other fungi besides store-bought ones in the beef wellington, the court heard.
Stuart said Patterson replied “no” and said she only used mushrooms from Woolworths and an Asian grocer, the court hears.
Rogers says: “Do you accept Prof Stuart asked you if you had been mushrooming?”
“I accept that’s what she said,” Patterson replies.
Patterson says she cannot remember the conversation with Stuart.
Rogers suggests Patterson lied to Stuart. Patterson says she was only asked about what was in the beef wellington.
“Nobody was interested in what I did months, years ago,” Patterson says. “I would have answered any questions in that context.”
Patterson says at the time she understood Stuart was only asking her questions about the beef wellington dish.
Updated
Patterson says she picked wild mushrooms on or after 28 April 2023 and prior to beef wellington lunch
Rogers takes Patterson to evidence by Dr Laura Muldoon that in a conversation with Patterson on 31 July while at Monash hospital, Patterson denied using wild mushrooms in the beef wellington.
Patterson says: “I think I did say that.” She says she did not think it was a lie at the time.
Under cross-examination, Patterson says she did pick wild mushrooms prior to 29 July 2023 – the day of the fateful lunch.
She says she did pick wild mushrooms on or after 28 April 2023 and prior to the lunch.
She says she did so at her Leongatha home, at Korumburra botanic gardens and from the “rail trail coming out of Leongatha”.
Rogers suggests Patterson lied to Muldoon. Patterson says she was only asked if she put wild mushrooms in the beef wellington meal.
Updated
Erin Patterson asked about Facebook group chat messages
Rogers returns to Patterson’s formal police interview. She takes Patterson to her answer where she denied she had foraged for mushrooms or “anything like that”.
Patterson says this was a lie.
Rogers takes Patterson to conversations she had with her Facebook friends in a group chat, including the wide-ranging topics they messaged about.
Rogers says: “Do you agree you never told any of these Facebook friends you had foraged for mushrooms?”
“I don’t know if I did or I didn’t,” Patterson says. “I don’t know if I told them or not.”
Rogers asks if Patterson discussed cooking wild mushrooms with her Facebook friends.
“I don’t know,” she says. Patterson says it was a group chat that had run for four years and she cannot remember everything the women talked about.
Rogers says one of the Facebook friends, Jenny Hay, has testified that Patterson never discussed foraging for wild mushrooms in the group chat.
Patterson says Hay “might be right”.
Updated
Patterson: ‘I lied because I was afraid I would be held responsible’
Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC says Erin Patterson dehydrated mushrooms, including ones she knew to be death cap mushrooms.
“No, that’s not correct,” Patterson says.
Rogers puts to Patterson:
You lied about dehydrating food and mushrooms because if you told the police the truth that would implicate you in the poisoned lunch. Agree or disagree?
Patterson says:
I agree I lied because I was afraid I would be held responsible.
Rogers says to Patterson:
I suggest you had been dehydrating death cap mushrooms on or after the date of purchase of the dehydrator for the purpose of putting into the beef wellingtons you served up to your four guests at the lunch.
“That’s not correct,” Patterson replies.
Updated
Erin Patterson denies travelling to Loch to look for death cap mushrooms
Rogers says Patterson saw retired pharmacist Christine McKenzie’s post on the citizen science iNaturalist on 18 April 2023 about death cap mushrooms in Loch.
“I disagree,” Patterson says.
Rogers says the accused then went to Loch on 28 April 2023.
Patterson says: “I don’t know if I did go to Loch that day.”
Patterson denies that she went to Loch on that day to find death cap mushrooms.
She denies that the photo of mushroom caps are the death caps she found at Loch on 28 April 2023. Paterson also denies that the photo shows death cap mushrooms.
Patterson denies she was weighing the mushrooms to determine the fatal amount to administer.
Updated
Erin Patterson says mushrooms in photo are not death caps
The jury is shown another photo with mushroom caps on a tray.
Rogers says mycologist Dr Thomas May gave evidence that the mushrooms were consistent with death caps.
Rogers says:
I suggest to you that these were death caps that you foraged on or after 28 April 2022. Correct?
Patterson replies:
No, that’s not correct.
Updated
Jurors updated on timeline of Patterson trial
Justice Christopher Beale has spoken to the jury about the timeline for the remainder of the trial.
Erin Patterson’s trial is in its sixth week. Beale reminds jurors he previously estimated the trial would run for six weeks.
“I’m not going to put a figure on how much time is left to run in this trial,” he says.
He says Patterson’s evidence will “probably” run into early next week.
After Patterson has completed evidence, there will be legal discussion between parties in the absence of the jury, Beale says.
He says one topic is whether there will be any more evidence in the case and what directions Beale will give the jury before they deliberate.
Those discussions will take a couple of days.
After all the evidence is completed we will then hear closing addresses from the prosecution and defence.
This will be followed by Beale’s directions to the jury, called the judge’s charge. Beale says this could take a couple of days.
He says the jury can take “all the time you need” when they begin deliberating.
Updated
Patterson shown photos of electronic scales
Erin Patterson is shown photos of electronic scales.
One photo, showing kitchen scales underneath mushrooms laid on a tray, was extracted from a tablet police seized from Patterson’s house. Another photo of digital scales was taken by police during a search of Patterson’s house on 5 August 2023 – a week after the lunch.
Rogers asks Patterson how many electronic scales she owned on 5 August 2023.
“I don’t know. At least one,” she says.
Updated
Patterson says daughter expressed surprise about muffins containing dried mushrooms after blind taste test
Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC turns to prior evidence that Erin Patterson told Simon she conducted a blind taste test with muffins cooked using dehydrated mushrooms. The court previously heard she remarked that their youngest child, who did not like mushrooms, preferred a muffin with dried mushrooms in it.
Under questioning by Rogers, Patterson agrees she did the blind taste test and says afterwards she told her daughter the muffins contained mushrooms.
“I said to her surprise there were mushrooms in it,” Patterson says.
Rogers asks what else Patterson put mushrooms in. She says she put them in spaghetti, lasagne, stews and brownies.
Patterson says: “I was trying to get extra vegetables into my kids’ bodies.”
Updated
Rogers says there is evidence from Patterson’s Facebook friends that she told them she had been dehydrating mushrooms. Erin says she used the dehydrator for other foods and believes she told her Facebook friends about this.
She says she used the appliance “to dry apples, bananas … quite a lot of different types of fruit”.
Rogers asks if she took photos of fruit she dehydrated.
“I don’t remember. I might have,” Patterson says.
Rogers takes Patterson to a Facebook message, sent in a group chat, where she wrote she had been “hiding powdered mushrooms in everything”.
Patterson says she used a Thermomix to blend the mushrooms.
Rogers says:
I suggest you were testing how you could hide mushrooms in food without someone noticing.
Patterson:
I was seeing if I could put mushrooms into my kids’ food.
Rogers says she was trying to do so without them noticing.
“Yes, that’s fair,” Patterson says.
Asked if she was only using the dehydrator for mushrooms, Patterson says, “I disagree.”
Updated
Patterson denies intentionally dehydrating death caps
Patterson is shown a photo of the dehydrator at the tip and asked if this is the one she owned.
“I presume so,” Patterson says.
“And why do you presume so again?” Rogers asks.
“Unless somebody else put in a dehydrator as well as me I presume this is the one I put in,” Patterson says.
Rogers tells Patterson it is an agreed fact in the trial that analysis by a fingerprint expert found the fingerprints on the dumped dehydrator matched Patterson’s fingerprints.
Rogers puts to Patterson: “You knew they were death cap mushrooms you’d been dehydrating?”
“No, I didn’t know that,” Patterson says.
Rogers says Patterson was “keen” to dispose of evidence she had dehydrated death cap mushrooms.
“No, I didn’t know they’d been in it,” Patterson says.
Patterson denies Rogers’ suggestion that the reason she rushed out of Monash hospital was to dispose of evidence she had dehydrated death cap mushrooms.
Updated
Patterson asked about disposing of dehydrator at tip
Rogers shows the jury a photo, previously tendered, of a dehydrator manual in Patterson’s kitchen drawer. The photo was taken by police on 5 August 2023 during a search of Patterson’s Leongatha home.
Patterson agrees it is the manual for the dehydrator she purchased in April 2023.
Rogers shows the court a photo of a dehydrator police found at the Koonwarra transfer station and landfill.
Roger asks: “That is your dehydrator?”
“I presume so,” Patterson says.
Asked to explain her answer, Patterson says she has heard evidence her fingerprints were found on the dehydrator.
Patterson agrees a photo of a red four-wheel drive vehicle captured at the Koonwarra transfer station and landfill on 2 August 2023 is her car.
Patterson agrees a black Sunbeam dehydrator was the only item she disposed of at the tip’s e-waste section on that day.
• This post was amended on 5 June 2025 to correct the location of the police search, which was at Patterson’s Leongatha home and not at Leongatha hospital as previously stated.
Updated
Patterson agrees she lied to police about not owning a dehydrator
Rogers asks Patterson about the questions she gave in her police interview about not owning a dehydrator:
It was a lie when you told police on that occasion that you didn’t own a dehydrator. Correct?
“Correct,” Patterson says.
Rogers says Patterson told her Facebook friends, some of whom have testified in the trial, in an online chat she had bought a dehydrator in early 2023. Patterson agrees.
Rogers takes Patterson to a tax invoice for a Sunbeam dehydrator from an appliances store in Leongatha. The jury is shown the invoice which is dated 28 April 2023 – three months prior to the lunch.
Patterson agrees this is what the invoice shows. She agrees she subsequently used the dehydrator.
Updated
Cross-examination of Erin Patterson begins
Erin Patterson’s cross-examination has begun in her triple murder trial.
Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC is cross-examining Patterson.
Updated
Defence concludes questions to Patterson
Colin Mandy SC takes Erin Patterson to elements of the prosecution’s case against her.
He asks if all the six beef wellingtons she cooked were the same. She says, “Yes.”
He asks if all the beef wellingtons she served on plates at the lunch were the same. She says, “Yes.”
He asks if she lied about her children eating leftovers of the same lunch.
“No,” Patterson says.
He asks his client if she pretended to be sick. She replies “no” as her voice trembles.
He asks if she has ever intentionally picked death cap mushrooms or used the toxic fungi in the beef wellingtons she prepared on 29 July 2023.
A visibly upset Patterson says “no” to both questions.
Patterson also said she did not lie about buying mushrooms from an Asian grocer in April 2023 and using those in the beef wellington.
Mandy asks Patterson if she intended to kill, seriously injure or harm each of her lunch guests.
Patterson, shaking her head, becomes visibly emotional during the questions.
She says, “No, I didn’t,” to each question.
Patterson reaches for a tissue as Mandy tells the court his examination of his client has concluded.
Updated
Patterson says she lied to police about owning a dehydrator
Mandy turns to the police search at Patterson’s Leongatha home.
Patterson says during the police search she was able to use her phone to make inquiries for her daughter’s activity and to call a lawyer.
Mandy turns to Patterson’s police interview when she was asked questions about a dehydrator. In the interview, an officer asked Patterson if she had ever dehydrated “food or anything”. Patterson replied, “No.”
“Was that a lie?” Mandy asks.
“It was,” says Patterson.
In the interview, she also denied owning a dehydrator or knowing anything about a dehydrator in her house.
Erin agrees both of these responses were lies.
Mandy asks why she told these lies.
Well, I had disposed of it a few days earlier, in the context of thinking that maybe mushrooms I’d foraged or the meal I’d prepared was responsible for making people sick.
Then on Saturday, Det Eppingstall told me that Gail and Heather had passed away and it was this stupid kneejerk reaction to dig deeper and keep lying.”
I was just scared, but I shouldn’t have done it.
Mandy takes his client to her answers in the police interview where she said she had never foraged for mushrooms.
Patterson says she lied for the same reason.
Updated
Patterson describes learning of lunch guests’ worsening symptoms
Patterson’s defence lawyer, Colin Mandy SC, is questioning his client.
He asks about her understanding of how unwell her lunch guests were after the beef wellington meal.
Patterson confirms her evidence that the day after the lunch – 30 July 2023 – Simon told her his parents, Don and Gail, were at Korumburra hospital.
She says on Monday morning – two days after the lunch – Simon’s brother told her Don was at Dandenong hospital. She says:
I think that’s the first time I knew that.
Patterson says on Tuesday afternoon she was told her relatives had been transferred to the Austin hospital.
She says it was “clear” to her there had been a “progression of symptoms” due to the hospital transfers.
From that it seemed likely to me they were getting sicker.
Updated
Jurors have entered the courtroom in Morwell.
Day 26 recap
While we wait for today’s proceedings to get under way, here’s a reminder of what the jury heard on Wednesday:
1. Patterson said her estranged husband, Simon, accused her of trying to poison his parents using a dehydrator the days after the lethal lunch. Patterson says Simon asked, “Is that how you poisoned my parents … using that dehydrator?”
2. The accused said she believes there is a “possibility” she unintentionally added foraged mushrooms to her beef wellington mix while trying to improve its “bland” flavour.
3. Patterson says she lied to her lunch guests about requiring cancer treatment because she was “embarrassed” to tell them about plans for weight loss surgery. “I was ashamed of the fact that I didn’t have control over my body or what I ate,” she said.
4. Patterson said she ate the remainder of a cake brought by her mother-in-law, Gail, to the fateful lunch. She says after consuming the cake in the evening, she felt “over-full” and “brought it back up again”.
5. Patterson also admitted she lied to Gail about requiring a needle biopsy the month before the lunch. She said when she mentioned a lump in her arm, her in-laws showed a lot of care, which “felt really nice”. “I shouldn’t have done it,” she said.
Updated
Good morning
Welcome to day 27 of Erin Patterson’s triple murder trial.
Patterson, who began testifying on Monday afternoon, is expected to continue giving evidence this morning.
The trial will resume from 10.30am once the jurors enter the courtroom in Morwell.
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 Leongatha, in regional Victoria, on 29 July 2023.
She is accused of murdering her in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, and her estranged husband’s aunt, Heather Wilkinson. The attempted murder charge relates to Heather’s husband, Ian.
She has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The prosecution alleges Patterson deliberately poisoned her lunch guests with “murderous intent”, but her lawyers say the poisoning was a tragic accident.
