Key events
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.
Court adjourns
The court has adjourned for the day.
Patterson’s cross-examination will continue from 10.30am tomorrow.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
