After the mushroom murders

After the mushroom murders

The spotlight this week is back on Erin Patterson, the Australian woman convicted of the mushroom murders, after her sentencing yesterday. In a first for Victoria, the proceedings were broadcast live from the court due to the intense public interest in this case, both here and overseas. So in this Squiz Shortcut, we’ll take a look at:

• what Patterson’s life will be like now

• and why the story has caught people’s attention all around the world…

Prefer this in your ears?

Listen to our podcast 🎧

Listen time: 14 minutes

Squiz the Shortcut

Can I get a quick reminder of what this case is about?
Sure thing… Erin Patterson is a 50yo woman who was found guilty in July of murdering 3 of her in-laws and attempting to murder one other by serving them a beef Wellington lunch laced with poisonous death cap mushrooms. She was sentenced for those crimes yesterday in Victoria’s Supreme Court. 

And what was the sentence?
Justice Christopher Beale sentenced Patterson to life in prison with a non-parole period of 33 years. The proceedings were livestreamed from the court, and thousands of people from all around the world tuned in to watch.

Is that normal?
No… It was the first time in the state that a sentencing has been filmed and broadcast live. The decision was made by Justice Beale in response to the intense public interest in the case. He said it would be the best way to “promptly and completely” communicate his reasons.

Who were the victims?
They were Don and Gail Patterson (the parents of Erin’s estranged husband Simon), and Gail’s sister Heather… The sole survivor was Heather’s husband, Ian Wilkinson. He also became critically ill after eating the lunch - he was hospitalised for 7 weeks and needed a liver transplant before he recovered. 

What were the circumstances?
In July 2023, Patterson invited her in-laws over to her house in Leongatha, a little country town in Victoria’s Gippsland region, along with Simon - but he pulled out the day before. That’s notable because, after Patterson’s trial, some information that the jury wasn’t privy to came out…

What was that?
Simon had fallen ill in the past from what he believed to be food poisoning after eating food prepared for him by Erin. He’d had part of his bowel removed following one of those instances, but it wasn’t proven that she poisoned him, so it wasn’t allowed as evidence. 

Why did she do it?
A motive wasn’t put forward in her trial, but it didn’t have to be. To find her guilty, the jury needed to be convinced she put the mushrooms in the lunch on purpose, with the intent of murdering her guests. 

What does she say happened?
Patterson has continued to maintain her innocence. She told the jury it was a terrible accident that poisonous mushrooms got into the lunch. 

Why is there so much interest in the case?
A lot of experts have weighed in with opinions on why the case has gripped people. One of them is criminologist Xanthe Mallett, and she reckons the fact that 3 deaths happened at a family lunch is a big factor. She says family lunches are such a relatable, ordinary event in people’s lives, and for one to be the setting of a sinister murder plot in sleepy country Victoria is something out of a detective novel or movie rather than real life…

What else has hooked people?
Mallett also says another intriguing element is the exotic mushrooms used for a poisoning plot by Patterson, who presented from the start as an average mum with no prior criminal record. Then there’s all the lies she told, which really seemed to pile up as the case unfolded…

What lies did she tell?
The jury heard that Patterson was caught lying about where she got the mushrooms for the lunch and about her knowledge of foraging and whether she’d owned a food dehydrator… She also admitted lying about being sick with cancer to get her in-laws to come over for lunch because she had some news about her health to tell them. Then there was her other behaviour…

Like what?
She refused to be admitted to hospital, even though she claimed to be sick with food poisoning from the same lunch that had rendered her relatives critically ill. Her use of multiple mobile phones before and after the lunch - one of which has never been found - also raised questions, along with her attempts to reset the phone she surrendered to police back to factory settings. Every time a new detail came out - even the fact that she chose to wear white pants on the day she claimed to be experiencing “explosive diarrhoea” from food poisoning - it compounded public interest in the case. Then the trial began, and that attention only intensified.

Where was the trial held?
Patterson chose to be tried in Morwell, a regional town near her home, instead of in Melbourne. It was a small courtroom with limited space for the public and the media - and the whole town was crammed with people… News organisations from all around the world sent journalists and camera crews over to cover it, and so every morning, a queue would form outside the court to get in. And it wasn’t just the media.

Who else turned up?
There were people from all walks of life showing up for the day - some openly saying they were missing work to be there - just to get a first-hand view of the proceedings.

So it was international news?
Yep… The case made headlines in the UK, the US, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, the Middle East and even Germany. In Britain, tabloids like The Daily Mail and The Sun ran almost daily updates. In the US, networks like CNN and The New York Times covered it. Across Asia, it made prime time bulletins. There are also podcasts dedicated to the case, countless articles, and at least 2 books are in the works by Aussie journalists. 

Any talk of films?
Yep, there’s also talk of film and TV production companies working on projects about Victoria’s real-life ‘gothic, culinary thriller’. As one article in The Guardian put it: ‘Publishing houses, streaming platforms, film studios and podcast producers are circling the story like salivating wolves closing in to make a killing.’... Some of those include a TV drama by the ABC called Toxic and a Stan documentary titled Death Cap. And all of the interest in the case has had a direct impact on Patterson’s life in jail.

How so?
Because the case is so well known, she’s spent the past 15 months isolated from the rest of the prison population for her own protection. In sentencing her, Justice Beale said that given all of the projects in the pipeline about her, she’s “likely to remain a notorious prisoner for many years to come, and, as such, remain at significant risk from other prisoners.”

What is her life like in prison?
She’s gone from being a mum - she has a son and daughter with Simon -  living in her comfortable house built with the money from 2 inheritances, to the confines of a small cell… She’s allowed supplies for crocheting, a hobby she’s taken up in jail, as well as a computer, TV, books, a fan and a hair straightener. But due to her solitary confinement, she spends 22 to 24 hours a day in that cell and has no contact with other inmates. It’s something her defence team argued was “inhumane” and should be taken into account by Justice Beale in her sentence. 

Did he do that?
Yes, he said he gave it “weighty” consideration, and it’s why he spared her from the harshest sentence available of life imprisonment without parole. 

Where will she be held?
Patterson’s likely to continue to be held at Melbourne’s Dame Phyllis Frost Centre, a maximum-security women’s correctional centre in the suburb of Ravenhall. The Gordon Unit, where she’s assigned, has been subject to frequent lockdowns due to staff shortages, and there’s been a cluster of suicide attempts by inmates this year. But Justice Beale was more concerned with the plight of the Patterson and Wilkinson families, whose lives had been irreversibly damaged…

What did he say?
He said that “ they keenly feel their limitations, and, in particular, the impossibility of shielding the youngest from the incessant discussion of the case in the media, online, in public spaces, even in the schoolyard.” That sentiment was echoed by Ian Wilkinson when he spoke outside the court. He thanked police, health workers and his local community, and he asked for his family's privacy to be respected as they continue to "grieve and heal."

What happens next?
Patterson’s legal team has until 6 October to lodge an appeal.

Let your smile shine

Smiling is one of our favourite things to do, but it helps when your teeth are at their best. The Smilie Teeth Whitening Kit offers visible results from the first treatment without the hefty price tag, delivered straight to your door. It'll even lift long-lasting stains without causing your toothy-pegs pain. Find out more here.

Onto our Recommendations

Watching: David Attenborough’s documentary Ocean which shows the issues being faced by the Pacific Islands due to the effects of climate change. You can find it on Disney+…

Reading: This piece in The Conversation - we’re on a roll with them. It’s called No room for the timid: setting Australia’s 2035 emissions target is a daring tightrope act and it gives a good overview of the investment dollars hinging on the 2035 climate target…

Recent Shortcuts