Erin Patterson mushroom murders: Lawyers seek to overturn triple-murder conviction

Members of Erin Patterson's legal team, (front row, from left) barrister Veronika Drago, barrister Richard Edney and lawyer Bill Doogue arrive at the Supreme Court of Victoria in Melbourne on August 19. Photo / Martin Keep, AFP

Australian mushroom killer Erin Patterson’s lawyers said on Wednesday the jury was not properly sequestered in her trial as they sought to overturn her conviction in a triple-murder case that sparked a worldwide media frenzy.

The 51-year-old was found guilty last year of murdering her husband’s parents and an elderly
aunt in 2023 by serving them a beef Wellington lunch laced with lethal death cap mushrooms.

Patterson was also convicted of the attempted murder of her husband’s uncle, a small-town local pastor who survived the beef-and-pastry dish after weeks in hospital.

A judge sentenced her to life imprisonment, eligible for parole after 33 years.

Three judges are hearing two appeals – Patterson’s attempt to overturn her conviction and the prosecution’s demand for a stiffer sentence – on Wednesday and Thursday.

Patterson watched the proceedings at Melbourne’s Supreme Court via a live video link from her maximum-security prison, the Dame Phyllis Frost Centre in Melbourne’s western suburbs.

She was wearing a blue prison jumper, national broadcaster ABC said.

Her lawyer, Richard Edney, argued that the fact that members of the jury had stayed in the same hotel as a witness for the police – as well as members of the prosecution – undermined the fairness of the trial.

He said it represented a “fundamental failure” of the legal process “in perhaps one of the most high-profile criminal trials this state has ever had”.

But he conceded there was no evidence to suggest the jury had communicated with others.

Patterson’s other lawyer, Veronika Drago, argued that some evidence allowed by the judge – relating to cell towers and posts of death cap mushroom sightings – had been “innocuous” and unreliable.

That she was forced to answer questions based on this evidence “arises to the level of a substantial miscarriage of justice”, Drago said.

Other evidence about mushroom images on a memory card in Patterson’s home was wrongly excluded, the lawyer said in an appeal submission in November last year.

Patterson’s solicitor additionally accused the prosecution of an “unfair and oppressive” cross-examination during the trial.

Source: Read the original article on www.nzherald.co.nz