The jury begins deliberations in the trial of murder

The jury retired in the prominent killing of an Australian woman accused of cooking the murderous mushroom lunch for relatives to self -determination.

Eren Patterson, 50, acknowledged that he was not guilty on four charges – three killing and one of the attempt to kill – for the lunch of cows and Lenton at her regional Victorian home in July 2023.

The prosecution claimed that Mrs. Patterson deliberately placed the mushroom of the roof of the toxic death in the cooked meal at home, before lying to the police and getting rid of evidence.

However, the defense argues that Mrs. Patterson included by mistake the toxic fungi in the dish and did not lie only because she was panic after harming the people who loved her.

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

Heather’s husband, the local priest Ian Wilkenson, recovered, after weeks in a coma. Simon Patterson, the husband of the separate accused, was also invited to lunch, but he withdrew the day before.

On Monday, Judge Christopher Bell gave his final instructions to the 14 -member jury, to summarize evidence from the prosecution and witness the only defense, Mrs. Patterson.

Nearly two months and more than 50 witnesses, the first 12 jury was identified by a polling before the group retires for deliberations.

In her closing arguments, Public Prosecutor Nanite Rogers said that Mrs. Patterson “told many lies that it was difficult to follow.”

The prosecution claimed that Mrs. Patterson lied to his relatives about the diagnosis of cancer to persuade them to attend the deadly lunch, poison them, then fake a disease to cover her paths.

They argued that she lies more than Mrs. Patterson in the police and medical employees about wild mushroom feed, in addition to her decision to empty the dry food used to prepare the meal, she was evidence of her guilt.

“I told lies of lies because she knew that the truth would be involved,” said Nanet Rogers.

“When I knew that her lies had been revealed, she reached a carefully built novel to suit the evidence – almost.”

There was no “special motivation” for the alleged crime, as Dr. Rogers told the court, but the jury should still face “any difficulty” in rejecting the argument. “This was all that is a terrible feed accident.”

However, the defense argued that the lack of motivation was a key. They said that Mrs. Patterson had no reason to kill her guests.

During Mrs. Patterson’s evidence, the jury told that she was very close to her fuse and never aimed to harm them.

While preparing for lunch, Mrs. Patterson claimed that she added a mushroom from a container in her store, which now realized that she had included both the mushrooms that were purchased from the store.

The court also told that it had suffered from the pathological evil for years, and made itself throwing itself after the meal of beef and Lengton – which its defense team says explains the reason for its illness like others who took it.

Ms. Patterson said that the lie about cancer was because it was embarrassing of plans to perform weight loss, and the authorities did not tell the truth about her absolute hobby on mushrooms because she feared that she would blame her for the disease of her relatives.

“It is not a trial for lying,” Defense lawyer Colin Mandy SC, “This is not a court of moral judgment.”

He accused the claim of trying to force “parts of the puzzles” of the evidence together, “expanding interpretations, and ignoring alternative interpretations because they are not fully in line with the narration.”

In his final instructions, Judge Bell told the jury members that they alone are “the facts of the facts in this case.”

He said that Mrs. Patterson should not be condemned for the mere lies, because there are “all kinds of reasons that make a person behave in a way that makes the person look guilty.”

He added that although “any reasonable person will feel severe sympathy” to the families of Patterson and Wilkenson, jury should also not allow emotions to be affected.

The jury has now been isolated, which means that while they are trading, they will remain in the places of supervision as they will have a significant contact with the outside world until they reached a decision.