Testing against the Australian woman accused of cooking a fatal lunch of mushrooms begins

An Australian woman accused of cooking fatal mushroom food admits that she chooses wild Fungi, is lying to the police and has evidence, but will claim that the “tragedy” was a “terrible incident”.

The trial of the Supreme Court against 50 -year -old Erin Patterson began in the small Victorian city of Morell on Wednesday and is expected to last six weeks.

She is accused of killing three relatives and attempting to kill another, with the case centered at lunch of Beef Wellington at her house in July 2023.

Patterson admitted that she was not guilty and her defense team said she “panicked” after involuntarily serving the poison of family members she loved.

Three people were killed in a hospital in the days after eating, including former laws of Mrs. Patterson, 70. Don Patterson and Gail Patterson, 70, as well as Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson, 66.

Guest from noon survived – local pastor Ian Wilkinson – after weeks of hospital treatment.

The fact that lunch of beef Wellington, potato potatoes and green beans contains mushrooms from the death hat and causes guest diseases is not in a dispute, the court heard.

“The general question is whether she intended to kill or cause very serious injuries,” said Judge Christopher Biel.

Finding the process on Wednesday, prosecutor Nanet Rogers SC said this case “was initially considered an event for mass food poisoning”.

But she claims that Da Patterson “deliberately poisoned” her guests “with murderous intentions after inviting them for lunch” to the claim, she was diagnosed with cancer. “

Dr. Rogers said the jury would hear evidence that Dza Patterson had traveled to a place near her home in Lengo, where observations of the mushroom of death were registered on a naturalist website.

And in the days after lunch, she made a number of steps to “cover up” what she did, prosecutors claim.

There will be evidence that she has lied to investigators about the mushroom source in the dish – saying they came from an Asian grocer in Melbourne and she has never invaded wild. And she made an excursion to a local landfill to throw away prosecutors to a food dehydrator, says she has prepared toxic food.

“You may be wondering,” What is the motive? “,” Said Dr. Rogers to the jurors, “you can still wonder this at the end of this process.”

The prosecutor’s office will not imply a specific motive, she explained.

“You don’t have to be pleased what the motive was, or even that it had one.”

What the jury could expect to hear, she said, was a testimony of a number of witnesses, including: G -Wilkinson, the alienated husband of G -Ja Patterson Simon Patterson, medical staff who treated the guests at lunch, and the police he was investigating.

However, the defense, by opening his case, reminded the jurors that they have not yet heard real evidence and have to keep an open mind.

Barrystar Colin Mandy says that while the prosecutor’s office will try to throw G -Ja Patterson’s behavior after lunch as “incriminating”, the jurors should consider how anyone can react in this situation.

“Can people say or do things that are not well thought out … and can make them look bad?”

“The defense case is that she panicked because she was buried by the fact that these four people got sick because of the food she served. Three people were killed.”

He said that D -Ja Patterson did not serve intentionally poisoned food to his guests.

“She did not intend to cause harm to anyone on this day … The incident was a tragedy, a terrible incident.”