Cook lunch tells the experimental meal was “special”

An Australian woman accused of cooking a mushroom lunch intentionally told her that her experience wanted to be a “distinctive” beef meal.

Erine Patterson acknowledged that he was not guilty of killing three people and trying to kill another at her home in Victoria in July 2023.

The 50 -year -old says she was a tragic accident, and that she has never intended to harm the family members she loves. But the prosecutors argue with Mrs. Patterson, put toxic fungi in their food in a carefully designed plot to kill them.

On Friday, the court heard that it is unusual “to host Mrs. Patterson such an event at her home, and she was interrogated about her relationships with her guests.

Mrs. Patterson, Don and Jill Patterson, both 70, along with the sister of Heather, Wilkenson, 66, are all sick and died days after lunch.

Heather’s husband, local priest Ian Wilkenson, was transferred to the hospital, but he recovered after he was recovered from a week -old coma. Simon Patterson, the wife of the separate accused, was also invited, but he went out the day before.

More than 50 witnesses of the prosecution presented evidence in the trial, which started six weeks ago, but Mrs. Patterson became the first to defense when she went to the situation on Monday.

On her second day of interrogation on Friday, Mrs. Patterson told the court that she had accepted that calls for her home were rare, but said that she had arranged this occasion to discuss a healthy case and wanted to provide a nice meal for her relatives to thank them for their support.

“I wanted to be special,” Mrs. Patterson said.

She had previously admitted that she had misled her guests to believe that she might need cancer treatment, and told the jury that she did this as a cover for weight loss surgery that she was planning, but she was very embarrassed to detect it.

However, the public prosecutor Nannet Rogers put it that there was no health problem to discuss, and that she called Simon and his relatives to kill them. Even a toxic backup meal was prepared if Mr. Patterson changed his opinion and came.

Over and over this week, Mrs. Patterson denied these allegations, and often became emotional because she told the court that she loves lunch guests Like her family.

The court also repeatedly told the court that, in the days after lunch, she realized that the beef and Lington may have accidentally included the dried mushrooms that were issued in it, which were kept in a container with those that are purchased from the stores.

She said that the lies for the police and the health authorities about the source of the mushroom and its decision to get rid of the food dryer alike because they were afraid to blame them for guest diseases.

“Certainly if you liked them, you will have informed the medical authorities immediately?” Dr. Rogers request.

Ms. Patterson said that she did not tell the doctors about the possibility that the wild mushrooms had been inadvertently included because lunch guests were already receiving a treatment for poisoning with mushrooms.

“Even after I was discharged from the hospital, you did not tell one person that there may be a fraud in the meal,” said Dr. Rogers.

“Instead, I woke up, I pushed your children to school … and went home. Then I got rid of dehydration.”

“Right,” Mrs. Patterson said.

The court heard that there was a struggle between Mrs. Patterson and her husband, and Dr. Rogers suggested that the accused was still angry at her son -in -law to take her alongside their son.

“You have two sides,” said Dr. Rogers.

Dr. Rogers said that there is a “general face” to appear a good relationship with Don and a generation, and a “special face” that she showed in the messages.

And she said, “How did you really feel about without a generation, how did I express it (there).”

“This is what I really felt towards Simon Patterson … you did not consider him a decent person in his essence, correct or incorrect?”

Mrs. Patterson, who was “incorrect”, replied her head and voice.

The MS Patterson was also examined for initatorist – which included Cap Cap sites in areas near her home – where the accused repeatedly said that she could not clearly remember the use of the site.

You will resume the examination over the next week. The judge told the court that the trial, which is expected to take six weeks, is now expected to run for at least two weeks.