Erin Patterson has been found guilty of murder over a fatal mushroom lunch, and now legal experts have revealed why her motive didn’t matter in the verdict.
Following a seven-week trial and six and a half days of jury deliberations at the Victorian Supreme Court in Morwell, the jury found that Patterson knowingly served death cap mushrooms in a beef wellington dish that led to the deaths of Don and Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson.
Ian Wilkinson, Heather’s husband and a local Baptist pastor, survived after weeks in intensive care.
Patterson, 50, pleaded not guilty to three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder. She testified in her own defence, saying she had no idea the mushrooms were toxic and panicked after her guests became ill.
Despite that claim, the jury was convinced that she intended to kill or seriously harm her guests.
Legal experts revealed motive is not required for murder conviction
Erin Patterson via YouTube
During the trial, Patterson’s defence, led by barrister Colin Mandy KC, emphasised that there was no clear motive for the alleged crimes.
However, legal experts say that motive is not a requirement for a murder conviction in Victoria.
According to Professor Rick Sarre and Associate Professor Ben Livings of the University of South Australia, all that is legally required is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had a “culpable state of mind.” In this case, an intention to kill or do serious bodily harm.
“A motive is a useful tool, but it was not necessary,” they explained. “In the case of the surviving guest, the jury was satisfied that there had been an intention to kill.”
So, what formed the core of the prosecution’s case?
Erin Patterson via YouTube
The prosecution did not present direct evidence of poisoning. They relied on a substantial body of circumstantial evidence. This included: Patterson controlled the ingredients used in the meal served to her guests at the lunch. Her meal portion did not contain the deadly mushrooms found in others’ dishes. She claimed to have sourced the mushrooms from an Asian grocer, but this was disputed during the trial. Patterson allegedly disposed of a dehydrator, which was later discovered discarded by investigators.
According to Sarre and Livings, most criminal cases rely on circumstantial evidence, and this one was no exception. They noted that this type of evidence can be just as compelling as direct testimony when the different pieces, taken together, lead to a clear conclusion.
During Patterson’s testimony, she described strained ties with her estranged husband’s family and personal trauma affecting her hospital discharges. Her testimony lasted less than an hour before the court adjourned. The defence argued her panicked behaviour and leaving hospital showed overwhelm, not guilt or an attempt to hide wrongdoing.
The maximum sentence for murder in Victoria is life imprisonment. The minimum non-parole period is 30 years unless the court considers it inappropriate to set one. Justice Christopher Beale will determine Patterson’s sentence following further submissions in the coming days and weeks.
For more news updates – like The Tab on Facebook. Featured image via YouTube.
