Latest / The Front / Mushroom jury’s out: Did Erin Patterson have a motive to murder?

Transcript

Mushroom jury’s out: Did Erin Patterson have a motive to murder? · The Front

• 0:03
  Speaker 1: From The Australian. Here's what's on the front. I'm Claire Harvey.
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: It's Tuesday, July one, twenty twenty five. Nations prepared to
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: pony up on defense spending could receive new missiles from
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: the US ahead of Australia. The revolutionary weapons are in
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: hot demand, but the growing gulf between Canberra and the
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: White House means Australia could miss out. Former PM Paul
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: Keating warns the government's proposed superannuation tax could affect millions
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: more people than expected. That story's live now at the
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: Australian dot com dot Au. Its decision time for Aaron Patterson.
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: The jury in her Victorian Supreme Court murder trial has
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: started deliberations. She's pleading not guilty to three murder charges
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: and one of attempted murder related to a deadly family
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: lunch at her home in twenty twenty three. So did
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: she have a motive to murder? That's today's episode. Did
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: Aaron Patterson have a motive to kill four elderly relatives
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: or did she have a motive not to kill them?
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: That's the key consideration for a jury that's been sent
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: out by Justice Christopher Beale. We've used voice actors throughout
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: this episode. Here's what the judge told the jury before
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: they began deliberations.
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: For some murders, there may be evidence of motive, but
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: some murders occur for no apparent reason. The motives of
• 1:45
  Speaker 2: such murders might only ever be known to the accused.
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: Patterson has told the court she loved Don Gale Patterson,
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: her parents in law, and Heather and Ian Wilkinson, the
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: aunt and uncle of her husband. Simon Simon Patterson, was
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: a witness for the Crown, who told the court during
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: the trial, Aaron had a good relationship with his parents.
• 2:07
  Speaker 3: She got on particularly well with Dad. They shared a
• 2:09
  Speaker 3: love of knowledge in the world, and I think she
• 2:12
  Speaker 3: liked his gentle nature. Mum and Dad were really active
• 2:15
  Speaker 3: in maintaining a good relationship with Erin.
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: I think it was mutual, but Simon Patterson told the
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: jury tensions emerged after their rocky marriage ultimately ended in separation.
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: He said Erin was angry when she saw his tax
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: return in late twenty twenty two, about seven months before
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: the fatal lunch.
• 2:37
  Speaker 3: She said that she discovered that my tax return for
• 2:39
  Speaker 3: the previous financial year had, for the first time noted
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: that we were separated before that we hadn't got the
• 2:45
  Speaker 3: government involved in the fact we were separated at all
• 2:48
  Speaker 3: before then, and so she said that mattered, I think
• 2:51
  Speaker 3: for the family tax benefit something of that nature, and
• 2:55
  Speaker 3: she would be obliged to claim child sport of me,
• 2:57
  Speaker 3: which had never happened before. So, yeah, she pointed that out,
• 3:01
  Speaker 3: and that was she was upset about it.
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: On Monday, the jury showed up at the Marwell Courthouse
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: with suitcases and bags ready to move into accommodation all together.
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: For the duration of their deliberations. They'll be sequested, that is,
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: they can't go home while they deliberate, returning to the
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: courthouse each day to sit in the jury room and
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: go through the evidence. At the conclusion of Justice Bial's directions,
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: two jurors were ejected after their numbers were drawn in
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: a ballot. Only twelve can now consider the verdict.
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: Now, once you've reached a unanimous verdict on each of
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: the charges, you should push the buzzer in the jury
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: room and tell my tip stuff. He will then arrange
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: for us all to return to court.
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: Justice Biale said jurors are welcome to ask questions of
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: the court by having their four person hand. A note
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: to court officers.
• 3:54
  Speaker 2: There's one thing that must not appear in any question
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: that you ask, and that's the numbers. I don't want
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: to know about it. I don't want to hear about it.
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: You should only discuss the case with each other, and
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: you should only do that when you are altogether in
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: the privacy of the jury room here in court. Don't
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: discuss when you're at the hotel. Don't get into little
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: groups and have discussions about the case. To prove that
• 4:29
  Speaker 2: the accused is guilty of murder, the prosecution must prove
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: the following four elements beyond reasonable doubt. One the accused
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: caused the death of the deceased by serving the deceased
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: a poisoned meal.
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: The judge said it wasn't disputed that Patterson served Heather
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: Dawn and Gail beef Wellington's that she had made that
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: were poisoned with death cap mushrooms, or that this caused
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: their debts.
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: Two, the accused alleged conduct was conscious, voluntary, and deliberate. Three,
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: at the time of the alleged conduct, the accused intended
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: to kill or cause really serious injury to the deceased.
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: Four The accused killed the deceased without lawful justification or excuse.
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: The judge said there was special meaning attached to the
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: words conscious, voluntary, and deliberate.
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: The term conscious excludes the acts of an unconscious person,
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: such as a sleepwalker. It's amazing sometimes what sleepwalkers can.
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: Do, he said. Voluntary means the accused must be in
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: control of her actions.
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: This excludes the acts of a person operating in one
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: of the number of rare mental states where the mind
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: loses control of the body's actions, and the term deliberate
• 5:50
  Speaker 2: excludes accidental acts.
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: Deliberate is the most important word, because that's what's in
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: dispute here. The defense says Patterson accidentally included deathcap mushrooms
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: in the meal eaten by everyone, and that she vomited
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: after the meal and didn't become seriously unwell. The Crown
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: says Patterson made a death cap free version of the
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: meal for herself and poisoned the four plates intended for
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: her guests. In relation to Ian Wilkinson, the man who
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: survived although he spent weeks in hospital, Patterson faces a
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: different charge, attempted murder. That means the requirements are slightly different.
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: The jury must find that Patterson.
• 6:31
  Speaker 2: Consciously, voluntarily and deliberately served Ian Wilkinson a poisoned meal,
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: the accused alleged conduct was a more than merely preparatory
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: to killing Ian Wilkinson, and b immediately and not remotely
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: connected with killing Ian Wilkinson.
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: That is, she wasn't just preparing to kill Ian Wilkinson,
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: that she actually intended to kill him in that moment,
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: and that there was no lawful justice, justification or excuse
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: for her conduct. Coming up the points the jury can
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: disagree on justice, Biale told the jury they have to agree,
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: but not completely.
• 7:27
  Speaker 2: In relation to each charge. Your verdict guilty or not
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: guilty must be unanimous. However, this requirement does not mean
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: that you must all reach your verdict for the same reasons.
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: On Monday, he rattled through the main elements of the
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: way the Crown and Defense summed up their cases. On
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: that crucial question of motive. He started with the Crowns
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: doctor Nannette Rodgers, who, he said, put it like.
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: This, Sometimes internal motivation is only known to the person themselves.
• 8:00
  Speaker 2: You don't have to know why a person does it
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: to know that they did it. The question is not
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: why she did it, but the question is whether you're
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she did.
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: The judge quoted in it Rogers telling the jury about
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: Simon's recollection of Don and Gail Patterson being dragged into
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: the dispute over money, and that the accused had told
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: others Simon had become nasty.
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: Their son noticed it. He said the relationship was very negative. Also,
• 8:32
  Speaker 2: the children had stopped staying over at Simon's. Simon spoke
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: of inflammatory messages so upsetting that they decided that Gail
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: would not read the group messages anymore. There was a
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: division deeper than the family knew. She expressed her true
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: feelings to her online friends, told them she was an atheist.
• 8:54
  Speaker 2: Aaron Patterson was duplicitous. Consider the eye roll emojis in
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: those messages. She's seeming accepted in her evidence in chief
• 9:02
  Speaker 2: and cross examination that they were eye rolling emojis, then
• 9:06
  Speaker 2: a moment later said you can't see that they are
• 9:09
  Speaker 2: eye rolls.
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: The judge reminded the jury of Roger's reading aloud Patterson's
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: messages about the family, which she sent to online friends.
• 9:20
  Speaker 4: This family, I swear to fucking God they are lost,
• 9:23
  Speaker 4: cause I'm sick of this shit. I want nothing to
• 9:26
  Speaker 4: do with them, so fuck them. Simon's messages will just
• 9:29
  Speaker 4: be horrible and be gaslighting and abusive and it will
• 9:32
  Speaker 4: ruin my day, and his parents' messages will be more
• 9:35
  Speaker 4: weasel words. I don't need anything from these people.
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: Just as Bill then ran through the way the defense
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: characterize Patterson's motive not to kill.
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: The defense said, because they're good people. Why on earth
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: would anyone want to kill them? Why would Aaron Patterson
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: want to kill them? Because of a brief period of
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: tension which didn't have anything to do with the Wilkinsons.
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: Don and Gaie were her children's only grandparents. The prosecution
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: has to prove intention. Motive can be important for proof
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: of intention. It's usually fundamental to proof of the intention.
• 10:13
  Speaker 2: In the absence of a motive, intention to kill or
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: cause really serious injury is very unlikely. If they can't
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: prove a motive, you might think the prosecution falls short
• 10:24
  Speaker 2: of proving intention. As a matter of logic and common sense.
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: The judge said the defense had outlined all the good
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: things in Patterson's life at the.
• 10:33
  Speaker 2: Time, big beautiful new house, newly landscaped garden, effectively sole
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: custody of her two children, comfortable financially, looking forward to
• 10:44
  Speaker 2: returning to study. If she carried out a murder, she
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: would inevitably attract suspicion. Focus would be on the cook
• 10:52
  Speaker 2: very quickly.
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: He reminded the jury the defense had take an issue
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: with the Crown's suggestion. Patison might have thought, would all
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: be mistaken for food poisoning? Pretty rare.
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: To get four people dying from a case of food poisoning,
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: an investigation was inevitable. A careful murderer would know the
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: spotlight would be on her as soon as these people
• 11:13
  Speaker 2: were hospitalized. She had good reason not to harm them.
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: She will lose the people who support her and her children,
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: and she'll lose her children.
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: The jury in the murder trial of Aaron Patterson will
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: continue their deliberations on Tuesday, and you'll hear it right
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: here on the front when the verdict is in. Our
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: subscribers at the Australian dot com dot Au have been
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: following every twist and turn, and they'll be reading and
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: watching the best analysis of this and all the big stories.
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: Join us at the Australian dot com dot Au