Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #5 *Arrest*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Only speaking for myself as you've replied on my comment ..... I'm not familiar with toxic patterns in relationships at all. Picking up on certain things can give an understanding of EP but it doesn't influence bias one way or another in reference to what took place at that fateful lunch. Until all evidence is available my mind is open to any possibility. Like everyone I'm discussing the known facts....no bias towards any scenario except to say "innocent until proven guilty".

Not to worry. It is a crime discussion board. People's opinions always vary. Any one of us could be right or could be wrong.

We are all measuring actions in conjunction with what happened, from our own perspectives from life, or other crimes we've followed, or whatever.

I personally am not big on measuring a person's verbal reactions in front of a camera because none of us know how we would act with TV cameras and reporters in front of our faces. But I am interested in their actions.
 
He said the poison is so potent that you do not even need to consume part of an actual mushroom to die, but simply eating or drinking liquid in which the mushrooms were cooked or boiled can be enough to kill you.

Dr L said that apart from being lethal, amatoxin's other danger was that it was 'extremely water soluble' and would be absorbed in the juice or gravy of a pie or casserole.

'So when you cook it in something, boil or fry it, it seeps in very quickly,' he said.

'When you eat the mushroom, it gets absorbed into the gastrointestinal tract super fast.

'But you can drop a mushroom into a glass of water and its gets absorbed very fast. You don't have to eat the mushroom, if you drink the water you will get poisoned.

'And it only takes a tiny amount of mushroom. There was the case of a 6ft 2ins man who ate a tiny bit of mushroom he picked off the grass in a mental health care facility. He was dead within three to four days.'
 
I think it was about more than financial assets, although that was part of the issue. The luncheon was supposed to be a mediation---but then her ex dropped out. So it became a 'negotiation. And it was probably about the financial settlements and custody. Those 4 were there to negotiate a better outcome for her ex.

I think she was possibly sick and tired of 'judgemental family interference' and feeling she was being unfairly scrutinised.

I think she wanted total independence in the future and she saw her ex and his meddling family as a threat to her future happiness and to her financial stability. In her mind, he sent his family to try and pressure her to give him more time with the children and perhaps a better financial settlement.

She had already been complaining [online] that he was never spending time with the kids and she was the only left with all the family responsibilities. So maybe it angered her that his family was trying to get involved and leverage the situation.

The 2 church members may have been collateral damage, although she may have been a bit angry with them has well. I think she may have felt they were judging her, and her ability to raise the children, as she was an atheist. And they may have wanted her to send the children to church or to religious school, etc.

This is all speculation on my part bus based upon the articles we have all seen.
I think EP had been beaten down by life, felt devoid of love and friendship and kind words and she had become angry and resentful and full of vengeful thoughts.
IMO she is an intelligent woman, is well read but thinks that she is smarter than others and definitely smarter and therefore more powerful than what others think she is.
With online forums to flex her intelligence and power and potentially a vivid imagination, it is possible that her real life versus her virtual/imaginary life had reached a point of dissonance and she was keen to transition from the former to the latter. This leads to motive...
IMO she wanted to have full unfettered (by redundant family members) and untainted (by religion) access to her children. She was tired of doing everything and getting no credit. She wanted to move on with her life in a position of power and was sick of being undervalued and underestimated. I believe that she embarked on this plan with no kind feelings for her ex-husband or his family and that she was hell bent on her plan and was unconcerned re collateral damage especially if that could be used in her favour later as a reason as to why it was an 'accident'.
Once her motive became all consuming she needed to come up with a plan, one that would work to achieve her goal but that allowed her to be able to get away with it.
Enter the mushroom plan, possibly formed and started many months ago. Using a dehydrator to intensify the mushroom poison was the first step, the second was to throw away that dehydrator and replace it with an identical squeaky clean one.
Choosing to cook beef wellington was a clever choice as all who ate from the same 'loaf' were at risk. Risk mitigation most likely included marking the end where the affected mushrooms were placed to have a 'safer' end. I believe EP ate from the same loaf as her guests and took further steps to reduce her risk including plating the safer portion on a dish closer to her than the others, eating bran beforehand to absorb toxins and then inducing vomiting as soon as they left to reduce the dose she had ingested. Having some level of toxicity/ symptoms in keeping with poisoning would make it seem more like an accident.
There is also the possibility that there was a gravy with mushroom poison in it that she didn't eat but that is less likely and again I think she made sure she was seen eating exactly what her guests did to cover her tracks.
Once the deed was done she needed to set up the rest of her 'alibi' by feeding the kids the same meal but 'without the mushrooms'. This is something they can verify and it emphasises her innocence as it is unanimously agreed that she is a mother who would never risk her children's lives. A second untainted loaf with mushrooms scraped off becomes the perfect foil for this and to have some leftovers for BL and LE.
Once her guests became ill she needed to appear distressed and scatty. The TV interview outside her house made her appear this way but IMO something was a bit off. She spoke in a way that suggested careful word choice to evoke emotion and to seem devastated, powerless and clueless. It gave me Baden Clay vibes.
The mushroom purchase stories are clever because they are very hard to check out and people empathise with not remembering pantry content purchase histories.
IMO she orchestrated the conversation about the dehydrator with her kids/ex so that it would explain why she dumped it in a 'panic'. She could have predicted that this move would get attention and that the tip had CCTV and that LE would find it. If it was the one used to dehydrate the mushrooms my elaborate theory is dead in the water but if it is clean, this was a masterful move as everyone again goes to the default position of underestimating her and then it works in her favour as the smoking gun is not smoking and people flip their opinion and say see she is too stupid to have done this and because there is no proof she should be free to go.
Another clever ploy is to get media hungry for the story by changing it. The more media frenzy the more likely the jury pool will be polluted should it ever go to trial.
JMO...
 
(snipped for focus)

IMO she orchestrated the conversation about the dehydrator with her kids/ex so that it would explain why she dumped it in a 'panic'. She could have predicted that this move would get attention and that the tip had CCTV and that LE would find it.


Taking the dehydrator to the local dump has played on my mind a bit. Because that made the dehydrator so easy to find. EP might just as well have handed it to the police.

Interesting theory BTW.
 
If Erin foraged for death cap mushrooms, which caused the death of three people and the hospitalisation and illness of a fourth person, she might face charges more serious than “financial” ones.

I doubt “fair trading” would hit her with a fine. She’d be looking at criminal charges.

IMO
People feeding poisonous mushrooms they have foraged to others is a semi regular occurrence.

Yet i'm not familiar with any cases where charges have been laid.

Granted the foragers often die themselves and so can't be charged! But not always.

No charges were layed in that case I posted earlier and the forager survived and the fed suffered grievous bodily harm;

I imagine the problem would be proving someone did it intentionally as opposed to just making an identification mistake.
 
I think EP had been beaten down by life, felt devoid of love and friendship and kind words and she had become angry and resentful and full of vengeful thoughts.
IMO she is an intelligent woman, is well read but thinks that she is smarter than others and definitely smarter and therefore more powerful than what others think she is.
With online forums to flex her intelligence and power and potentially a vivid imagination, it is possible that her real life versus her virtual/imaginary life had reached a point of dissonance and she was keen to transition from the former to the latter. This leads to motive...
IMO she wanted to have full unfettered (by redundant family members) and untainted (by religion) access to her children. She was tired of doing everything and getting no credit. She wanted to move on with her life in a position of power and was sick of being undervalued and underestimated. I believe that she embarked on this plan with no kind feelings for her ex-husband or his family and that she was hell bent on her plan and was unconcerned re collateral damage especially if that could be used in her favour later as a reason as to why it was an 'accident'.
Once her motive became all consuming she needed to come up with a plan, one that would work to achieve her goal but that allowed her to be able to get away with it.
Enter the mushroom plan, possibly formed and started many months ago. Using a dehydrator to intensify the mushroom poison was the first step, the second was to throw away that dehydrator and replace it with an identical squeaky clean one.
Choosing to cook beef wellington was a clever choice as all who ate from the same 'loaf' were at risk. Risk mitigation most likely included marking the end where the affected mushrooms were placed to have a 'safer' end. I believe EP ate from the same loaf as her guests and took further steps to reduce her risk including plating the safer portion on a dish closer to her than the others, eating bran beforehand to absorb toxins and then inducing vomiting as soon as they left to reduce the dose she had ingested. Having some level of toxicity/ symptoms in keeping with poisoning would make it seem more like an accident.
There is also the possibility that there was a gravy with mushroom poison in it that she didn't eat but that is less likely and again I think she made sure she was seen eating exactly what her guests did to cover her tracks.
Once the deed was done she needed to set up the rest of her 'alibi' by feeding the kids the same meal but 'without the mushrooms'. This is something they can verify and it emphasises her innocence as it is unanimously agreed that she is a mother who would never risk her children's lives. A second untainted loaf with mushrooms scraped off becomes the perfect foil for this and to have some leftovers for BL and LE.
Once her guests became ill she needed to appear distressed and scatty. The TV interview outside her house made her appear this way but IMO something was a bit off. She spoke in a way that suggested careful word choice to evoke emotion and to seem devastated, powerless and clueless. It gave me Baden Clay vibes.
The mushroom purchase stories are clever because they are very hard to check out and people empathise with not remembering pantry content purchase histories.
IMO she orchestrated the conversation about the dehydrator with her kids/ex so that it would explain why she dumped it in a 'panic'. She could have predicted that this move would get attention and that the tip had CCTV and that LE would find it. If it was the one used to dehydrate the mushrooms my elaborate theory is dead in the water but if it is clean, this was a masterful move as everyone again goes to the default position of underestimating her and then it works in her favour as the smoking gun is not smoking and people flip their opinion and say see she is too stupid to have done this and because there is no proof she should be free to go.
Another clever ploy is to get media hungry for the story by changing it. The more media frenzy the more likely the jury pool will be polluted should it ever go to trial.
JMO...
Perfect.

So she’s possibly clearing out the relatives to make way for a less cluttered real life to enable her to have more capacity to engage more in her online / fantasy life?

A life where, presumably, she can be smart and popular and her looks don’t really matter.

Imagine taking the gamble of eating the “clean” end of the loaf! What a nail-biting (or finger-biting) scenario!

A bit of excitement for her in an otherwise mundane type of existence.

I wonder when she hired her hot-shot lawyer and if she had him lined up a week or two beforehand?

IMO
 
He said the poison is so potent that you do not even need to consume part of an actual mushroom to die, but simply eating or drinking liquid in which the mushrooms were cooked or boiled can be enough to kill you.

Dr L said that apart from being lethal, amatoxin's other danger was that it was 'extremely water soluble' and would be absorbed in the juice or gravy of a pie or casserole.

'So when you cook it in something, boil or fry it, it seeps in very quickly,' he said.

'When you eat the mushroom, it gets absorbed into the gastrointestinal tract super fast.

'But you can drop a mushroom into a glass of water and its gets absorbed very fast. You don't have to eat the mushroom, if you drink the water you will get poisoned.

'And it only takes a tiny amount of mushroom. There was the case of a 6ft 2ins man who ate a tiny bit of mushroom he picked off the grass in a mental health care facility. He was dead within three to four days.'
That's been bothering me because they are anonymous and they are contradicting another 'expert' who isn't anonymous. There shouldn't be disagreement about something as basic as how long the toxin is detectable IN MY OPINION.
 
Last edited:
Around 30 parishioners prayed for Mr Wilkinson's continued recovery in South Gippsland church on Sunday.

'He's doing OK, that's all we really know at the moment,' a churchgoer told the Herald Sun.

'He's certainly improving.'

Last week, church attendee Trevor Shaw told the publication the town longed for the 'truth' to be revealed.

'All of them have been praying earnestly for Ian's recovery and that the truth will come out,' he said.

'That's the main thing. That the truth will come out, and then we'll all be able to, in a sense, relax because then there'll be some closure.'

It comes as members of the tight-knit Korumburra Baptist Church will remember his wife, Mrs Wilkinson, at a public memorial on Wednesday.
 
If the Asian grocer exists they HYPOTHETICALLY must have a forager who ALLEDGEDLY f'ed up badly and both that forager and the store would HYPOTHETICALLY be facing financially terrifying legal issues.
RSBM.

I think it's very unlikely that any dried mushrooms purchased at a store would be foraged. If a death cap somehow did find its way into a container of store-bought mushroom it would have to be a problem with the supply chain and not because the store had foragers combing the countryside.

Truly foraged produce, like truffles or ramps, tend to be quite expensive because of the inherent costs and low yield of gathering produce in the wild. When they are served they are usually made the centerpiece of the dish, not just an ingredient in a complex recipe.

Even products like the "forest mix" mentioned earlier in the thread are almost certainly cultivated mushrooms and not foraged in the wild.
 
No I think you missed my point.

It's because it was said she came across as confident and angry and I was saying that I don't see that in her.

It's nothing to do with empathy. It's that I see someone different to how some are portraying her.

I understand what you see and I see it, too. Some things that are held against her I view as positive (allowing her kids to draw on walls - this is cool!).

But, we have a person who we might sympathize with, and we have a situation needing an explanation. Four people walk in her door, get meals, walk out, by midnight three are seriously ill, by morning all are brought in the hospital, in 4-5 days, three out of the four are dead.

While EP might be viewed as the victim of newspapers and public opinion because she doesn't have certain charisma, there are four victims, human beings whose death or near-death experience have to be accounted for.

And, there is a mushroom industry in Australia going down.

<modsnip - off topic>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Around 30 parishioners prayed for Mr Wilkinson's continued recovery in South Gippsland church on Sunday.

'He's doing OK, that's all we really know at the moment,' a churchgoer told the Herald Sun.

'He's certainly improving.'

Last week, church attendee Trevor Shaw told the publication the town longed for the 'truth' to be revealed.

'All of them have been praying earnestly for Ian's recovery and that the truth will come out,' he said.

'That's the main thing. That the truth will come out, and then we'll all be able to, in a sense, relax because then there'll be some closure.'

It comes as members of the tight-knit Korumburra Baptist Church will remember his wife, Mrs Wilkinson, at a public memorial on Wednesday.

I am very happy that Mr. Wilkinson made it. Condolences to him for losing his wife and in-laws.

<modsnip: off topic>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I understand what you see and I see it, too. Some things that are held against her I view as positive (allowing her kids to draw on walls - this is cool!).

But, we have a person who we might sympathize with, and we have a situation needing an explanation. Four people walk in her door, get meals, walk out, by midnight three are seriously ill, by morning all are brought in the hospital, in 4-5 days, three out of the four are dead.

While EP might be viewed as the victim of newspapers and public opinion because she doesn't have certain charisma, there are four victims, human beings whose death or near-death experience have to be accounted for.

And, there is a mushroom industry in Australia going down.

<modsnip - off topic>

What we see is sad, but it's an observation it doesn't elicit sympathy. It could provide the basis for motive IF something sinister was planned and carried out. IMO
 
Last edited:
That's been bothering me because they are anonymous and they are contradicting another 'expert' who isn't anonymous. There shouldn't be disagreement about something as basic as how long the toxin is detectable IN MY OPINION.
DBM
I understand what you see and I see it, too. Some things that are held against her I view as positive (allowing her kids to draw on walls - this is cool!).

But, we have a person who we might sympathize with, and we have a situation needing an explanation. Four people walk in her door, get meals, walk out, by midnight three are seriously ill, by morning all are brought in the hospital, in 4-5 days, three out of the four are dead.

While EP might be viewed as the victim of newspapers and public opinion because she doesn't have certain charisma, there are four victims, human beings whose death or near-death experience have to be accounted for.

And, there is a mushroom industry in Australia going down.

<modsnip - off topic>
 
Yeah sure. Check out this zinger of an article by Tita Smith, DMA:

Thanks very much.
I'm not sure I see what you both see in there? <modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks very much.
I'm not sure I see what you both see in there? <modsnip>
<modsnip - response to snip in quoted post> It is more about her kind of arrogant opinions---like calling the locals of her small town 'ignorant M____ Effers'

She came across as petty, bitter and arrogant, imo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RSBM.

I think it's very unlikely that any dried mushrooms purchased at a store would be foraged. If a death cap somehow did find its way into a container of store-bought mushroom it would have to be a problem with the supply chain and not because the store had foragers combing the countryside.

Truly foraged produce, like truffles or ramps, tend to be quite expensive because of the inherent costs and low yield of gathering produce in the wild. When they are served they are usually made the centerpiece of the dish, not just an ingredient in a complex recipe.

Even products like the "forest mix" mentioned earlier in the thread are almost certainly cultivated mushrooms and not foraged in the wild.
Interesting point ch_13.

As I was reading your post, "restaurants" popped into my head. In my area (regional south=eastern Australia - where wild mushrooms are common) there is a restaurant which frequently mentions in their publicity, that they offer meals containing foraged ingredients.
It seems, (I am happy to be corrected) that establishments which offer meals containing foraged ingredients, are considered to be rather trendy (up until now anyway).

An extract from a local restaurant's publicity (with identifying details and location removed) states -
"Paying homage to locally grown and foraged foods, stop into our new restaurant (name and locality deleted), for an intimate dining experience. A moody vibe of subdued lighting,..."

Any thoughts about this, Websleuthers?

TIA
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
157
Guests online
2,228
Total visitors
2,385

Forum statistics

Threads
580,935
Messages
17,764,565
Members
225,108
Latest member
Alex8801
Back
Top