Mushroom killer Erin Patterson will appeal her conviction, according to multiple media reports, although a legal expert says the judge made the case “virtually appeal-proof”.
The mushroom cook, 50, faces a sentence of life for three murders and one attempted murder of her estranged husband’s family.
She is expected to return to court for a pre-sentence hearing later in 2025.
But Emeritus Professor in Law at the University of South Australia Rick Sarre said it would be difficult for Patterson to successfully challenge her convictions.
Meanwhile, best-selling Australian cook Nagi Maehashi, whose beef Wellington recipe was used for the fatal lunch, has spoken about her “upsetting” connection to the case.
Patterson used Maehashi’s recipe from one of her popular RecipeTin Eats cookbooks to make the dinner that killed her guests.
“It is, of course, upsetting to learn that one of my recipes – perhaps the one I’ve spent more hours perfecting than any other – something that I created to bring joy and happiness, is entangled in this tragic situation,” Maehashi wrote on Instagram.
“Other than that, I have nothing to say and I won’t be talking to anyone. Thank you for respecting my privacy.”
After Monday’s verdict, the doctor who treated Patterson when she and her victims went to hospital has also spoken out, labelling the killer as “evil”.
Chris Webster was the attending medic when Patterson went to Leongatha Hospital in regional Victoria after the lunch in 2023.
“I explained that death cap mushroom poisoning was suspected and [asked] ‘Where’d you get the mushrooms?’,” Webster told the ABC on Tuesday.
Her single-word reply, “Woolworths”, immediately led him to conclude that Patterson was behind the poisonings.
“When she didn’t respond in a way that instantly would have explained it as a tragic accident, that’s it, from that moment in my mind she was guilty,” he said.
“She was evil and very smart to have planned it all and carried it out but didn’t quite dot every ‘i’ and cross every ‘t’.”
Webster said Patterson also showed no empathy towards her victims.
“Erin sat in a chair and I don’t even remember her looking in the direction of Ian and Heather Wilkinson … they weren’t barriered (sic), there were opened curtains on the cubicle,” he said.
“When people come through the doors that I led Erin through, they usually make a beeline for their [loved one]. They go straight to that bed and they embrace the loved one,” he said.
“They usually cry or shake or respond in an emotive way and then they spin around and they try to find a nurse or a doctor to come over and explain what’s going on to their loved one.”
But, he told the ABC, Patterson lacked “any sort of expected normal human emotional response”.
‘Appeal-proof’ sentence
Multiple media outlets reported on Wednesday that Patterson was planning to lodge an appeal after receiving her sentence.
But Sarre said the “meticulous detail” of Supreme Court Justice Christopher Beale has made the case “virtually appeal-proof”.
Beale, who presided over the almost 11-week trial in regional Victoria, spent four days delivering his final directions to jurors.
“I don’t think it will get past the leave-to-appeal process, even if the lawyers do want to go ahead with it,” Sarre said.
Grounds for any appeal by Patterson would be based on an error in the Beale’s directions, or if there was an issue in the jury reaching its verdicts, he said.
Sarre did not think the jury’s verdict could be challenged, given it took seven days to deliberate.
“It would be a very difficult task for her to mount a successful appeal on the basis of the conviction,” he said.
“We just have to wait at the moment to see what the sentence is to determine whether or not there can be any appeal in terms of severity of sentence.”
No obvious motive
Interest in the mushroom murder trial shows no sign of slowing down, driven by a fascination with female killers and a lack of obvious motive.
The 50-year-old mother of two’s defence team had unsuccessfully argued her lack of motive was a reason the jury should find her not guilty.
“I don’t know what her motive is, I think the only person [who] does is her and she’s maintaining her innocence, so we may never know what drove this,” criminal psychologist Tim Watson-Munro said.
Watson-Munro pointed to Patterson’s age, gender, lack of prior convictions, seemingly quiet country life and the fact one person survived the lunch as key areas of intrigue for people fascinated with true crime.
“All of that, without being flippant, is a bit Shakespearean,” he said.
It became the biggest true crime story in Australia and interest in the case was driven by a boom in podcasts covering the trial, RMIT University journalism professor Alex Wake said.
Renowned author Helen Garner was spotted at court while several television series are in development, including a documentary from streamer Stan and ABC drama Toxic, told from Patterson’s perspective.
Other offerings include a Nine documentary, Murder By Mushroom and Seven’s “deep dive” Spotlight special, with both ready for release days after the verdict.
The trial was a “pop culture moment” driven by the absence of an obvious motive and by the method of killing, University of Melbourne associate professor Lauren Rosewarne said.
“There was a genuine mystery at the heart of this story,” she said.
“She did it using the method that women [use to] kill people in crime novels: Poison.”
Much attention was paid to Patterson’s appearance and lack of emotion in court, with Rosewarne drawing parallels to Lindy Chamberlain who was eventually exonerated over the death of her daughter Azaria.
-with AAP
Live News
