Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course there’s a financial motive! She might have to split assets in a divorce. We have read so many cases here at Websleuths where the husbands kill the wives because they do not want to give up money. I am not sure why people are failing to see this as a motive just because it is the woman who has the money in this case.
I had the impression that they'd already had the property settlement. If so, there would be no further asset split in a divorce.
 
I explored the idea of EP having a financial motive early in the case. But when we found out that EP inherited from her mother and is reasonably wealthy now, that doesn't seem to be a strong motive.

However, "Patterson said in the statement that she was worried she would lose custody of their children". I realise that was in the context of her husband accusing her of poisoning his parents so she "dumped the hydrator in the tip and panicked".


"Erin’s in-laws and several church elders had reportedly gone to her home on the 29th to discuss new arrangements for Simon to see the former couple’s children."


I have never been aware before that child custody was the reason for the three deceased and the survivor to attend the lunch. I had only read in the media that it was a "mediation".

We have not been given any information as to what the present child custody arrangements are. Maybe EP had argued her case and received full custody of the children previously (perhaps due to SP's illness). Perhaps since he recovered, he has been talking to his parents about gaining shared custody or even full custody of their children which has angered EP. So maybe her in-laws suggested meeting over a lunch and invited the Minister and his wife to mediate the discussions. Perhaps SP had already set up a court date to proceed with this so he didn't think there would be any value gained by his presence so he cancelled the lunch at the last minute.

What is the definition of an unstable parent?

Examples of unfit parents include those who have drug or alcohol problems and foster an unsafe living environment as a result or a parent with a mental illness who is unstable.


Only about 11% of fathers gain full custody of their children in Australia. Perhaps SP has evidence of EP's mental instability? Maybe the children would rather live with their father?

What age can a child choose to live with a parent in Australia?

The Family Law Act 1975 in Australia doesn't provide a defined age when a child can single-handedly choose which parent they want to reside with.


IMO if child custody was the reason for their mediation, if EP thought that SP's parents were going to argue against her having joint of full custody in court, and she thought there might be a chance of the child custody arrangements changing to her disadvantage by something that the in-laws had evidence of, could that be a strong motive for murder?
There's also the possibility -at least this is something I can imagine - that if EP has felt under pressure from, say, her ex or others, has felt that there may be a question around her ongoing custody of the children for whatever reasons - whether that might be justified in reality or not - it's possible that when (according to her statement) SP accused her of poisoning the in-laws at the hospital using the dehydrator, that being sensitive to this (speculated) ongoing situation (pressure or insinuation from ex or others over a period of time that she is 'unfit' for eg), she may have just panicked and dumped the dehydrator for no reason whatsoever apart from an acquired fear of the power others might have over her to remove her children. This is only speculation. Perhaps she used the dehydrator in the past on foraged mushrooms, perhaps she used it to dehydrate some other substance that is not strictly legal (ie pot) -* Note, am not accusing EP of using at all, just giving some reasons why dumping dehydrator could have been knee jerk reaction to ex's accusation if there happens to exist an ongoing pattern of her perceiving hostility and believing that she is in a less powerful position to defend herself and her parenting and that she is under threat (real or imagined) of losing her children. All speculation, all Moo.
 
Of course there’s a financial motive! She might have to split assets in a divorce. We have read so many cases here at Websleuths where the husbands kill the wives because they do not want to give up money. I am not sure why people are failing to see this as a motive just because it is the woman who has the money in this case.
Division of assets occurred prior to her mother's death from what I can gather. MOO
In Australia, divorce is not necessary for this to occur.
 
I explored the idea of EP having a financial motive early in the case. But when we found out that EP inherited from her mother and is reasonably wealthy now, that doesn't seem to be a strong motive.

However, "Patterson said in the statement that she was worried she would lose custody of their children". I realise that was in the context of her husband accusing her of poisoning his parents so she "dumped the hydrator in the tip and panicked".


"Erin’s in-laws and several church elders had reportedly gone to her home on the 29th to discuss new arrangements for Simon to see the former couple’s children."


I have never been aware before that child custody was the reason for the three deceased and the survivor to attend the lunch. I had only read in the media that it was a "mediation".

We have not been given any information as to what the present child custody arrangements are. Maybe EP had argued her case and received full custody of the children previously (perhaps due to SP's illness). Perhaps since he recovered, he has been talking to his parents about gaining shared custody or even full custody of their children which has angered EP. So maybe her in-laws suggested meeting over a lunch and invited the Minister and his wife to mediate the discussions. Perhaps SP had already set up a court date to proceed with this so he didn't think there would be any value gained by his presence so he cancelled the lunch at the last minute.

What is the definition of an unstable parent?

Examples of unfit parents include those who have drug or alcohol problems and foster an unsafe living environment as a result or a parent with a mental illness who is unstable.


Only about 11% of fathers gain full custody of their children in Australia. Perhaps SP has evidence of EP's mental instability? Maybe the children would rather live with their father?

What age can a child choose to live with a parent in Australia?

The Family Law Act 1975 in Australia doesn't provide a defined age when a child can single-handedly choose which parent they want to reside with.


IMO if child custody was the reason for their mediation, if EP thought that SP's parents were going to argue against her having joint of full custody in court, and she thought there might be a chance of the child custody arrangements changing to her disadvantage by something that the in-laws had evidence of, could that be a strong motive for murder?
Then in other media, you read this:

"Ms Patterson had invited her ex-husband Simon’s parents Gail and Don Patterson, his aunt Heather Wilkinson and her pastor husband Ian to her home in an effort to try and negotiate a reconciliation with her ex, according to the Daily Mail.

Simon was also invited but pulled out at the last minute, a close friend of Simon’s told the publication.

“They went to her house for a mediation to talk to the family. Simon was supposed to go there for lunch but he pulled out in the last minute otherwise he would be in that death bed too,” the friend said, adding that Simon was not interested in getting back with the mother of his children."


My question is: Was EP only interested in reconciliation due to their possible child custody issues? IMO

However, if this was a premeditated murder, EP did not want to wait until after the mediation to take action, she had already planned it. This indicates that she had already given up. IMO
 
Last edited:
Then in other media, you read this:

"Ms Patterson had invited her ex-husband Simon’s parents Gail and Don Patterson, his aunt Heather Wilkinson and her pastor husband Ian to her home in an effort to try and negotiate a reconciliation with her ex, according to the Daily Mail.

Simon was also invited but pulled out at the last minute, a close friend of Simon’s told the publication.

“They went to her house for a mediation to talk to the family. Simon was supposed to go there for lunch but he pulled out in the last minute otherwise he would be in that death bed too,” the friend said, adding that Simon was not interested in getting back with the mother of his children."


My question is: Was EP only interested in reconciliation due to their child custody issues?
The child custody issues aren't a fact though are they? I think that's something else that's been suggested and speculated but certainly not confirmed. Moo

ETA: only referring to bolded section of your post. Imo neither lunch time mediation session or child custody as a basis for such can be confirmed as facts atm.
 
The child custody issues aren't a fact though are they? I think that's something else that's been suggested and speculated but certainly not confirmed. Moo

ETA: only referring to bolded section of your post. Imo neither lunch time mediation session or child custody as a basis for such can be confirmed as facts atm.

No I agree. I was only speculating (ALL IMO) in trying to find a possible stronger motive than financial issues for alleged murders. People are sometimes murdered because they have knowledge of something that the possible murderer doesn't want revealed especially not in court. EP and SP were apparently married in 2006 so 17 years of observing her behaviour. IMO
 
No I agree. I was only speculating (ALL IMO) in trying to find a possible stronger motive than financial issues for alleged murders. People are sometimes murdered because they have knowledge of something that the possible murderer doesn't want revealed especially not in court. EP and SP were apparently married in 2006 so 17 years of observing her behaviour. IMO
I agree for sure, motives for murder can be, and Imo often are emotional. In those instances perhaps only the perpetrator knows the reasons and even then it's not like they would necessarily be clear on what drove them to cross that line - like if we have a good handle on ourselves and are able to self-observe from a distance the 'reason' stays as fantasy or whatever (Imo). Moo Pre-meditated murder means crossing that line and from the perp's POV having a justification to do so.

Sorry if I was pedantic - I knew you were probably stating that as an opinion/speculation only. I've just experienced so many times when someone doesn't moo something leading to something becoming 'fact' - the way rumours spread and become fact in a lot of social media forums. I do love WS for trying to keep that stuff to a minimum and nip in bud!
 
I agree for sure, motives for murder can be, and Imo often are emotional. In those instances perhaps only the perpetrator knows the reasons and even then it's not like they would necessarily be clear on what drove them to cross that line - like if we have a good handle on ourselves and are able to self-observe from a distance the 'reason' stays as fantasy or whatever (Imo). Moo Pre-meditated murder means crossing that line and from the perp's POV having a justification to do so.

Sorry if I was pedantic - I knew you were probably stating that as an opinion/speculation only. I've just experienced so many times when someone doesn't moo something leading to something becoming 'fact' - the way rumours spread and become fact in a lot of social media forums. I do love WS for trying to keep that stuff to a minimum and nip in bud!
In your opinion, is putting ALL IMO at the end of a post good enough? However, I was referring to two media articles which are within quotation marks!
 
Last edited:
In your opinion, is putting ALL IMO at the end of a post good enough. However, I was referring to media articles which are in brackets.
Idk, there are different ways - just so that it's clear that a sentence is an opinion or speculation and not fact. That's Jmo. In the case of the sentence I highlighted, when you added possible that made it clear you were speculating Imo. Without the word possible - post just shows two Msm articles with extrapolated quotes, then a sentence that read (before the insertion of 'possible') as fact. Jmo! -
Better to move on as I feel like we're getting off topic!
 



So two have been buried it seems. Let’s hope toxicology reports don’t take too long.
 



So two have been buried it seems. Let’s hope toxicology reports don’t take too long.
Earlier today I thought all the funerals were still on hold, still delayed by the police investigation.

"The families of three people who died after eating a poisonous mushroom lunch have been forced to wait for further police inquiries before they can bury their loved ones."

"It is unclear how long the grieving family members of the three dead lunch guests will have to wait for further police inquiries into their deaths."

Updated: 01:32 AEST, 23 August 2023
(BBM).

That reads as an assertion that none of the victims had been buried by early AEST on 23rd August. Moo

But five hours later

By Candace Sutton for Daily Mail Australia
Updated: 07:25 23 Aug 2023

"A couple who died from a suspected mushroom poisoning in Victoria were laid to rest in a discreet private ceremony earlier this week."

Wondering if the 'Eerie Twist' is referring to the new asserted fact that two victims were laid to rest "earlier this week". Two contradictory assertions made as if they are fact within the space of five hours. Annoying! Moo

I'm taking it as true that SPs' parents' funerals have already taken place given the more recent article provides some level of detail. Wishing all the victims' loved ones support and love. This must be a very difficult time for them. :-(
 

Poor Gail and Don Patterson, currently buried in an unmarked grave at Korumburra General Cemetery.

May they Rest In Peace.
 
RSBM

I'm taking it as true that SPs' parents' funerals have already taken place given the more recent article provides some level of detail. Wishing all the victims' loved ones support and love. This must be a very difficult time for them. :-(

Yes, JennieM posted a link earlier today that said the Pattersons had been interred. It was in the link in the post about the planned memorial service. Link

Multiple media outlets are reporting on it as the family released a statement to them today.

I would guess that the family deliberately withheld that information earlier because they wanted a completely private funeral.

a.jpg
 
Yes, JennieM posted a link earlier today that said the Pattersons had been interred. It was in the link in the post about the planned memorial service. Link

Multiple media outlets are reporting on it as the family released a statement to them today.

I would guess that the family deliberately withheld that information earlier because they wanted a completely private funeral.

View attachment 442446
Thanks South Aussie - Also posting article from ABC. My annoyance stems from Daily M publishing as fact that all families were still waiting. Imo that must have been unverified at the time. My fault for not sticking with other outlets that chose to wait for verification. Moo

 
maybe protecting a family member who went foraging with her and picked the wrong mushrooms?
didnt want that person to carry that stigma all their life?
EP currently says the mushrooms were bought from an Asian grocery shop, not foraged. But if they were foraged, by someone else, as 'an experienced wild mushroom forager' you'd think she would recognise they were DC mushrooms while preparing them

 
Thoughts on SP being absent at the lunch?

My conflicting theories:
- his parents were the driving force behind the meeting. They wanted to restore the family unit and were bringing the church with them to lunch to help their case. Neither EP or SP wanted that. SP decided last minute not to engage with them at all.

- SP always intended to pull out at the last minute - why though?

- SP was unwell or had something else on.
 
All of the following is MOO.

Undoubtedly, child custody (i.e., loss of control) may be a motive (or a contributing factor) in this case. That in mind, despite EP coming into a substantial inheritance, money (i.e., greed) may also be a motive (or a contributing factor). We do not know what EP’s outstanding debts or other financial pressures (if any) are. We do not know if EP feels entitled to certain assets that she (or her children) may have more freely obtained from the passing of any (or all) of the victims.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
152
Guests online
3,947
Total visitors
4,099

Forum statistics

Threads
595,874
Messages
18,035,875
Members
229,815
Latest member
Blondeboricua
Back
Top