Erin Patterson, 51, who was sentenced to life in prison for killing three relatives with a poisoned Beef Wellington, is set to return to court in a bid to have her conviction overturned. Her appeal will be heard by a three-judge panel at the Victorian Court of Appeal in Melbourne, starting Wednesday.
Background of the case
Patterson was found guilty of lacing a meal served to her in-laws with deathcap mushrooms. Her ex-husband's parents, Don Patterson, 70, and Gail Patterson, 70, died in hospital after eating the meal at her home in Victoria, Australia, along with Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson, 66. Ian Wilkinson, a local church minister, survived after having an emergency liver transplant.
The 11-week trial heard that the relationship between Patterson and her estranged husband, Simon, had broken down in the months leading up to the lunch on July 29, 2023. The life sentence with a 33-year non-parole period was handed down in September.
Grounds for appeal
Patterson maintains that the deaths were accidental, and that she did not know the mushrooms were poisonous. Her lawyers claim that the prosecution's five-day cross-examination was "unfair and oppressive" and have questioned evidence such as mobile phone tower data and social media posts reporting sightings of death cap mushrooms, which they say should never have been presented to the jury.
Patterson's team argues the evidence was not relevant and was prejudicial, causing a miscarriage of justice. They also argue that other evidence, including photos and images relating to her mushroom foraging hobby that support their argument the deaths were an accident, had been wrongly excluded. The appeal document also cites jury deliberations.
Alleged jury irregularity
The case drew worldwide attention, and steps were taken throughout the trial to ensure the jury was not influenced by family, friends, or the media. When deliberations began, jurors had to stay in supervised accommodation with limited contact with the outside world until a decision was reached.
However, Patterson's lawyers argue a "fundamental irregularity" took place which "fatally undermined" the integrity of the verdicts. Due to room shortages in the areas around the courthouse, jurors ended up in a hotel which also had members of the prosecution, a key police witness, and journalists staying there. The judge at the time said the jury had a whole floor to themselves and there was no evidence they had any contact with anyone linked to the case. Patterson's team said in their appeal filing: "[This] requires the quashing of the convictions and an order for a re-trial so that justice cannot only be done but be seen to be done."
Prosecution's separate appeal
The Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has filed a separate appeal, arguing that Patterson's current sentence is "manifestly inadequate" given that three people were killed and another left seriously ill. Prosecutors also claim that the judge allowed the expectation that Patterson would spend extended periods of her sentence in solitary confinement, to protect her from fellow prisoners, to influence his sentence.
If the prosecution's appeal is successful, Patterson's parole period could be extended beyond 33 years or she could be given a sentence of life without parole. The appeal is set to last two days. Under Australian law, appeals are heard by a bench of three senior judges, not a new jury. Defence teams must prove specific flaws took place in the original trial. Should the appeal be successful, the case would be eligible to go to a retrial or an acquittal.
