Speaker 1: Nine podcasts.
Speaker 2: In this episode, Aaron Patterson finishes her time on the
Speaker 2: witness stand after eight days. In the final hours of
Speaker 2: her evidence, more questions are asked about gastric bypass surgery.
Speaker 2: With the jury told lawyers have collected more information. The
Speaker 2: accused killer maintains she fed her children leftovers from the
Speaker 2: fatal lunch, and she answers three final questions from the prosecution.
Speaker 3: Victoria's mushroom mystery, the mushroom lunch that claimed three lives
Speaker 3: an Australian family's meal is now the center of a
Speaker 3: homicide investigation. The bizarre tragedy now grabbing global headlines. Aaron
Speaker 3: Patterson's alleged victims died after eating a family lunch she'd
Speaker 3: serve them at her home.
Speaker 1: I cannot think of another investigation that has generated this
Speaker 1: level of media and public interest.
Speaker 2: Four of the guests of that lunch were much loved
Speaker 2: members of this church.
Speaker 4: Only one will ever return.
Speaker 1: People are feeling very heavy with having lost wonderful people.
Speaker 2: Today, Aaron Patterson remained here inside her home.
Speaker 4: She's continued to plead her innocence in a court room
Speaker 4: in Country Victoria.
Speaker 2: Aaron Patterson is on trial accused of using death cap
Speaker 2: mushrooms to kill. She's pleaded not guilty to murdering three
Speaker 2: of her former in laws and attempting to kill a fourth,
Speaker 2: the town's church pastor. It's up to the jurors to
Speaker 2: decide what happened when Patterson's loved ones sat down to eat.
Speaker 2: Aaron Patterson has been on the witness stand across eight
Speaker 2: days now. There's been days of cross examination and also
Speaker 2: questions with her defense barrister, initially an examination in chief
Speaker 2: and then now we've seen all of his final questions
Speaker 2: in the re examination as well.
Speaker 3: It was quite a moment in the courtroom when the
Speaker 3: judge turned to the jury and said that now completes
Speaker 3: the evidence. As you said, eight days, the accused woman
Speaker 3: has been in the witness box, and you could hear
Speaker 3: a sigh from the packed court room and also from
Speaker 3: a number of jury members when the judge revealed that
Speaker 3: was what was happening and what was happening next. At
Speaker 3: that time, Aaron Patterson was seated, as you said, in
Speaker 3: the witness box. She had been a little bit teary
Speaker 3: towards the end of her evidence, but largely had remained
Speaker 3: pretty stoic answering pretty much every question and even gave
Speaker 3: explanations as well as denials. There was a bit of
Speaker 3: a mixture of both, Penny.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and we will in this episode take you through
Speaker 2: a number of different topics that the prosecution took Aaron
Speaker 2: Patterson through in the last part of her cross examination,
Speaker 2: as well as the re examination from the defense, and
Speaker 2: will bring you what both sides have asked Aaron Patterson
Speaker 2: in these final hours around gastric bypass surgery. But let's
Speaker 2: start with the mushrooms from the Asian grosser. Now, Aaron
Speaker 2: Patterson says that she bought dried mushrooms from an Asian
Speaker 2: or Chinese grosser in the southeastern suburbs of Melbourne, and
Speaker 2: that she'd added this to the beef Wellington, but became
Speaker 2: concerned at one point that there may have been foraged
Speaker 2: mushrooms in that dried mushroom mixture. She's been asked a
Speaker 2: lot of questions about these particular mushrooms.
Speaker 3: He's also been asked a lot of questions about what
Speaker 3: she recalls telling the other witnesses in the trial about
Speaker 3: those mushrooms and the order of events, and she recalled
Speaker 3: that the first person that she told about the fact
Speaker 3: that could be Asian mushrooms in the meal. Was Matthew Patterson,
Speaker 3: her brother in law. Now Matthew at that time, the
Speaker 3: jury were told, was at hospital with his father and
Speaker 3: a toxicologist had come into the room and ask questions
Speaker 3: about where the mushrooms may have come from, and that's
Speaker 3: when Aaron Patterson says that she recounted that there was
Speaker 3: these dried mushrooms that she'd used. And as part of
Speaker 3: this questioning to try and narrow down on exactly what
Speaker 3: she remembered, Penny and Nett Rogers put to the witness
Speaker 3: that she had worked for a number of years in
Speaker 3: that Monash City Council area and should that, according to
Speaker 3: the prosecution, mean that you really knew that area well,
Speaker 3: those suburbs, well, there was somewhere where you'd worked, and
Speaker 3: she also owned a property at one point.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And it was mentioned to Aaron Patterson that she
Speaker 2: could name some of these particular streets that she'd shopped on,
Speaker 2: but she said in her cross examination that she didn't
Speaker 2: really know that this particular area well. And as she
Speaker 2: was being taken through the evidence of a number of
Speaker 2: different witnesses, public health officials, people that she'd had discussions
Speaker 2: with as they were trying to find the source of
Speaker 2: this possible poisoning. It was put to her by the
Speaker 2: prosecution that she hadn't answered these questions, that she hadn't
Speaker 2: always been forthcoming in her communication on phones and on
Speaker 2: text messages and in what she was telling different people
Speaker 2: at different times, and the Crown Prosecutor Annette Rodgers accused
Speaker 2: Aaron Patterson of taking these authorities on a wild goose chase.
Speaker 3: Yep yeap. She was asked whether or not this whole idea,
Speaker 3: this whole concept of having dried mushrooms in your pantry
Speaker 3: you'd purchased from this Asian grocer's store that you couldn't remember,
Speaker 3: was a big fat lie? Was it true? Were you
Speaker 3: making up this story in order to send investigators from
Speaker 3: the Health department from the Monash City Council on this
Speaker 3: while goosechase to find something that didn't exist, to give
Speaker 3: you more time to figure out what you were going
Speaker 3: to do. And it was repeatedly put to Aaron Patterson,
Speaker 3: were a lot of these post lunch actions because you
Speaker 3: were worried that doctors had gotten non sooner rather than later,
Speaker 3: that deathcat mushrooms may have been involved, and she maintained no, repeatedly,
Speaker 3: repeatedly disagreed with any suggestion that there was deliberate mushroom poisoning.
Speaker 5: In that lunch, we'll bring you.
Speaker 4: A bit of the evidence. Now.
Speaker 2: This is Nannette Rodgers, sc the Crown Prosecutor, speaking with
Speaker 2: Aaron Patterson in the cross examination, and she's talking about
Speaker 2: a part of the evidence where Aaron Patterson says in
Speaker 2: her police interview that she'd been very helpful to these
Speaker 2: health authorities. And you'll also hear some references to someone
Speaker 2: in this questioning, and that person is Sally Anne Atkinson.
Speaker 2: She's been one of the witnesses and one of the
Speaker 2: people working with the health authorities to try and find
Speaker 2: the source of the Asian mushrooms.
Speaker 3: This is voiced by actors.
Speaker 1: I suggest that you weren't very very helpful to the
Speaker 1: department at all.
Speaker 5: I was trying to be that was untrue, incorrect.
Speaker 1: In fact, you sent them on a wild goose chase
Speaker 1: trying to locate this Asian groser correct or incorrect, incorrect.
Speaker 1: Initially you were not very responsive to the Department of Health.
Speaker 1: I think that's been your evidence.
Speaker 5: No, it's not my evidence. The first time she rang me.
Speaker 5: I answered and spoke to her for fifteen.
Speaker 1: Minutes on one August twenty twenty three at eight thirty
Speaker 1: three am.
Speaker 5: Correct, But then.
Speaker 1: You didn't respond to some of the other texts correct.
Speaker 5: Correct. I think we've established why that was already.
Speaker 1: And I suggest that the reason that you didn't answer
Speaker 1: some of those texts from her was because you did
Speaker 1: not want to be pressed for details about the Asian
Speaker 1: grocery store. Incorrect, because that story was not true.
Speaker 5: Incorrect.
Speaker 1: It was a lie that you used dried mushrooms from
Speaker 1: an Asian grosser correct or incorrect.
Speaker 5: Incorrect.
Speaker 1: You lied about the source of the death cap mushrooms
Speaker 1: because you knew you were gill of having deliberately poisoned
Speaker 1: your four lunch guests.
Speaker 5: Incorrect.
Speaker 2: Another part of Aaron Patterson's evidence that was gone back
Speaker 2: and forth on as part of the cross examination was
Speaker 2: what happened with her children around this lunch, and she
Speaker 2: maintains that she fed her son and her daughter on
Speaker 2: the Sunday night following the Saturday lunch the leftovers from
Speaker 2: this meal.
Speaker 3: The evidence the jury has heard as part of this
Speaker 3: particular topic was that Aaron Patterson told medical personnel and
Speaker 3: authorities that the Sunday after the lunch, the dinner time.
Speaker 3: After the lunch, she had fed the leftovers to her children.
Speaker 3: She'd scraped off the mushroom paste, she'd scraped off the pastry,
Speaker 3: and fed them what meat was left. She'd also then
Speaker 3: served up some beans and also some potato with hers
Speaker 3: part of her examination in the final days as well,
Speaker 3: we heard from the prosecution questions put to Patterson about
Speaker 3: what her kids recalled of that meal. So her children,
Speaker 3: the prosecution say, in their evidence, recalled that Aaron Patterson
Speaker 3: shared some of those leftovers with her children but didn't
Speaker 3: really eat a lot of them, and that her son
Speaker 3: finished them off. But Aaron Patterson, while in the witness box,
Speaker 3: said no, no, no, that they have a wrong recollection
Speaker 3: of what happened. In fact, I didn't eat any of
Speaker 3: those leftovers. I tried to eat cereal, but I wasn't
Speaker 3: feeling very well.
Speaker 2: She was taken to the evidence of another witness who
Speaker 2: says Aaron Patterson told her she tried to eat some
Speaker 2: cereal on that night, but not the dinner because she
Speaker 2: wasn't feeling well enough.
Speaker 4: So she disputed the children's.
Speaker 2: Recollection of that particular dinner meal that was served. She
Speaker 2: was also taken through her shopping in the lead up
Speaker 2: to this meal, and it was expressed by the prosecution
Speaker 2: that Aaron Patterson, through these shopping records, the Woolworth shopping
Speaker 2: records that have been shown in the courtroom, went to
Speaker 2: the shops multiple times.
Speaker 4: To get ingredients for this meal. She agreed that.
Speaker 2: She did, but when she was asked specifically by Annette
Speaker 2: Rogers sc about the meat of this particular recipe, the
Speaker 2: recipe in each's recipe was calling for that that was
Speaker 2: supposed to be a log, and the jury was again
Speaker 2: shown this recipe step by step up on the screens.
Speaker 4: In the courtroom.
Speaker 2: The net Rodgers put to Aaron Patterson, you could have
Speaker 2: tried to get a log like this, a bigger piece
Speaker 2: of meat from a local butcher. Aaron Patterson denied that.
Speaker 2: She said that she'd looked at her local Woolworths, that
Speaker 2: she couldn't find a bigger piece of meat, and so
Speaker 2: that's why she got the individual stakes. And she denied
Speaker 2: the allegation from the prosecution that she had deliberately sought
Speaker 2: out those individual steaks so as she could make individual
Speaker 2: meals to begin with.
Speaker 3: And that meat and the size of the meat was
Speaker 3: another questioning element that arose in the final hours of
Speaker 3: Aaron Patterson's evidence about why did you cook six beef
Speaker 3: Wallingtons and when you knew you were only having four
Speaker 3: lunch guests. And her explanation was, she brought those I
Speaker 3: fill at stakes in twin packs and she'd put two
Speaker 3: of those twin packs in the freezer, and that's why
Speaker 3: she had therefore cooked an extra beef Wllington.
Speaker 2: The jury's also heard a lot about other ingredients in
Speaker 2: this meal, specifically mushrooms, and Aaron Patterson agreed with the
Speaker 2: prosecution that she had purchased in the days leading up
Speaker 2: to the lunch around one point seventy five grams of mushrooms,
Speaker 2: and she agreed the recipe called for about seven hundred grams.
Speaker 2: She told the prosecutor and Nett Rodgers that she'd eaten
Speaker 2: the extra kilo of mushrooms in those days between the
Speaker 2: twenty third and the twenty seventh of July, and that
Speaker 2: left her with seven hundred and fifty grams to make
Speaker 2: the meal.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and she said it wasn't unusual for her to
Speaker 3: purchase large amounts of mushrooms and would in her memory,
Speaker 3: often purchase them a couple of times a week. But
Speaker 3: she did explain that her children didn't like mushrooms, her
Speaker 3: daughter in particular didn't really like mushrooms. And she was
Speaker 3: then asked questions by the prosecution about well, did you
Speaker 3: then tell the authorities that you scraped off that mushroom pace,
Speaker 3: that those mushrooms were used to make purely to try
Speaker 3: and mislead them and to explain why the children weren't sick.
Speaker 3: That's another thing she denied. She said, no, no, no, no, no.
Speaker 3: We saw her get a little bit emotional when her
Speaker 3: children were mentioned in different parts of questioning, But this
Speaker 3: was a denial. She really focused quite heavily on that. No,
Speaker 3: she did not make up this lie to try and
Speaker 3: cover her tracks as to why her children weren't sick.
Speaker 2: Yeah, she maintained through her evidence that she had scraped
Speaker 2: off those mushrooms and the pastry, and that that had
Speaker 2: gone into an outdoor been at her home that was
Speaker 2: later collected by police and used for some testing through
Speaker 2: the different health authorities as the patients were falling sicker
Speaker 2: and sicker. Now, with what Aaron Patterson was being asked
Speaker 2: around her children, eating this meal. It was put to
Speaker 2: her a number of times that she seemed, according to
Speaker 2: some witnesses in their evidence, reluctant to have the children
Speaker 2: treated at hospital. Now, she maintained that she may have
Speaker 2: been reluctant initially, but that's because she thought the children
Speaker 2: hadn't eaten the mushrooms and there was no real risk.
Speaker 2: But she says once she realized that there was real
Speaker 2: concern that there could have been deathcat mushrooms in the
Speaker 2: meal eaten by the children, even though there was no
Speaker 2: mushrooms on the particular bit, they ate that she did
Speaker 2: want them to be checked out at hospital.
Speaker 3: There was a couple of hours after the jury were
Speaker 3: told Aaron Patterson found out that there was this risk
Speaker 3: of death cap mushroom contamination that she arranged for her
Speaker 3: children to be collected from school and then taken to
Speaker 3: hospital to be examined. And we know that they did
Speaker 3: stay there overnight for observation.
Speaker 2: And Aaron Patterson has been spoken to by the prosecution
Speaker 2: in the cross examination about how she was feeling at
Speaker 2: this time when she made the kids dinner on the
Speaker 2: Sunday night, it was put to her that there was
Speaker 2: evidence from a doctor from the Monash Medical Center that
Speaker 2: she later ended up at, that she'd thought she had
Speaker 2: food poisoning symptoms. Aaron Patterson disputed that she said when
Speaker 2: she first arrived at the Lee and Gatha Hospital, which
Speaker 2: is the first hospital she went to on the Monday
Speaker 2: following the Sunday night, she felt that she had gastro symptoms,
Speaker 2: So she said she didn't think she had food poisoning
Speaker 2: and disputed that she made her children a dish when
Speaker 2: she thought that that leftovers could have made her sick initially.
Speaker 2: She was then taken to some evidence and some different
Speaker 2: parts that the court has heard regarding when she found
Speaker 2: out that Don and Gail Patterson, her in laws, were unwell,
Speaker 2: and the court heard that she first knew on the
Speaker 2: Sunday that they weren't well.
Speaker 3: It was a Sunday morning. The jury heard that Aaron
Speaker 3: Patterson found out through her estranged husband, Simon Patterson, that
Speaker 3: Don and Gail Patterson were unwell. She maintains so that
Speaker 3: she didn't think or know, or was informed in any way,
Speaker 3: shape or form that they were sick from something that
Speaker 3: had come from the meal. In her mind, it may
Speaker 3: have just been this gastro that was going around and
Speaker 3: at that point when she fed her children the leftovers,
Speaker 3: she says, with the mushroom and pastry scraped off, that
Speaker 3: she really had no idea that it could be the
Speaker 3: meal that was making everybody sick.
Speaker 2: Let's hear a little bit more of the evidence during
Speaker 2: the cross examination. This is the words of Aaron Patterson
Speaker 2: and Annette Rogers.
Speaker 1: I suggest that you told well over a dozen people,
Speaker 1: including your son and daughter, health professionals, child protection workers, police,
Speaker 1: and a friend, that you had fed your children the
Speaker 1: same meal that you had served at lunch on twenty
Speaker 1: nine July twenty twenty three.
Speaker 5: Oh, I was pretty clear. It was the meal minus
Speaker 5: the mushrooms and pastries, so not the same.
Speaker 1: But yes, But isn't it the fact that on Sunday
Speaker 1: thirty July you found out that at least Don and
Speaker 1: Gail were unwell.
Speaker 5: Yes, I did find out about that.
Speaker 1: So why did you proceed to feed the same meal
Speaker 1: to your children when you knew or suspected that the
Speaker 1: meal that you'd served had made them ill?
Speaker 5: I didn't. I didn't know suspect that.
Speaker 1: Your son gave evidence in his recorded interview that you
Speaker 1: told him that Gail and Don were not well. Do
Speaker 1: you remember the evidence? I do you told that to him?
Speaker 5: I'm sure I did.
Speaker 1: Yeah, on the Sunday night.
Speaker 5: I don't know when on the Sunday or I don't
Speaker 5: know when I told him that, but I did tell him.
Speaker 2: The accused woman has also been taken through whether she
Speaker 2: deliberately sought out deathcap mushrooms. That's been a key part
Speaker 2: of all of the evidence in this trial. In her questioning,
Speaker 2: and she's told the court that she did not del
Speaker 2: liberately seek out mushrooms in either of the Gippsland towns
Speaker 2: of Locke and Outram, where there's been evidence that there
Speaker 2: were posts on the Iron Naturalist site about sightings of
Speaker 2: mushrooms in these locations.
Speaker 3: We know from the evidence of one of the other witnesses,
Speaker 3: a cell tower expert. He maintains that he could see
Speaker 3: on the data that the phone connected to Aaron Patterson
Speaker 3: pinned in those particular areas on certain days. Aaron Patterson
Speaker 3: maintains that that is not true. Maybe she passed through
Speaker 3: the areas or or whatnot, but there was in no
Speaker 3: way she had any memory of deliberately driving to those
Speaker 3: two locations after posts were made on the Our Naturalist
Speaker 3: showing where deathcap mushrooms were growing. Yeah.
Speaker 2: When she was asked about doctor Tom May's post regarding
Speaker 2: the deathcap mushrooms he'd cited at Outram, she told the court, Well,
Speaker 2: she said disagree when she was asked a question about
Speaker 2: seeing that particular post and then heading to that area.
Speaker 2: And we'll hear a little bit more about what she
Speaker 2: was asked regards adding another post in Locke and what
Speaker 2: she did after. The prosecution says she visited that particular area.
Speaker 5: This is voiced by actors.
Speaker 1: I suggest that you read the Christine McKenzie post that
Speaker 1: she'd posted on I Naturalist on eighteen April. Agree or disagree?
Speaker 5: Disagree?
Speaker 1: I suggest you drove to Locke from your house at
Speaker 1: Leanngatha to specifically find death cap mushrooms on twenty eight April.
Speaker 5: Disagree, and I.
Speaker 1: Suggest that you found some Agree or disagree?
Speaker 5: Disagree, And I.
Speaker 1: Suggest that within two hours of finding those death cap
Speaker 1: mushrooms you drove to the Hartley Wells Better Home Living
Speaker 1: in Leengatha and bought yourself a dehydrator at twelve seventeen PM.
Speaker 5: I did buy that that day, yes, And.
Speaker 1: The purpose of buying the dehydrator was to dehydrate death
Speaker 1: cap mushrooms. Agree or disagree?
Speaker 2: Disagree now, Aaron Patterson told the court, Yes, as you heard,
Speaker 2: she did buy a dehydrature and it was on that
Speaker 2: particular day in April twenty twenty three.
Speaker 4: She agreed it was in some part to preserve wild.
Speaker 2: Mushrooms, to use them at different parts of the year,
Speaker 2: and also to preserve other foods.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right. So she really disputed any accusation that
Speaker 3: it was purchased purely to dry death cap mushrooms and
Speaker 3: then feed them to her lunch guests. And she was
Speaker 3: also then asked a few questions about her foraging and
Speaker 3: whether or not there could have been deathcap mushrooms in
Speaker 3: what she'd foraged, And she was explaining to the jury
Speaker 3: that there's only a couple of months of the year
Speaker 3: that you can forage mushrooms. She said, this is autumn.
Speaker 3: And she said, so it's that March April may period
Speaker 3: here in Victoria, Australia that you can purchase that you
Speaker 3: can forage for these types of mushrooms, she told the jury.
Speaker 3: So she would have only been possibly able to do
Speaker 3: it a handful of times.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And she told the jury previously in some of
Speaker 2: her evidence which she was taken to by the Crown Prosecutor,
Speaker 2: that when she developed these interest in mushrooms around the
Speaker 2: COVID lockdowns of twenty twenty, that her children were with
Speaker 2: her on some of these walks and times where they
Speaker 2: saw these particular mushrooms out growing in the wild.
Speaker 4: Now she disputed the.
Speaker 2: Evidence of her estranged husband, Simon Patterson. He told the
Speaker 2: court that he had never and it's come through other
Speaker 2: witnesses evidence that he had and all the time he'd
Speaker 2: known her, never known her.
Speaker 4: To forage or pick wild mushrooms.
Speaker 2: And she sort of said, well, how would he necessarily
Speaker 2: know that? And she was taken through a number of
Speaker 2: different questions that maybe she not necessarily had told that
Speaker 2: to Simon Patterson.
Speaker 4: She didn't think that she had.
Speaker 3: She explained that in their signal chat groups, Penny, there
Speaker 3: was many, many, many messages that were sent between the
Speaker 3: family and also her and Simon Patterson, and she was
Speaker 3: asked why in none of those was there any mention
Speaker 3: of her foraging mushrooms, And she explained that that wasn't
Speaker 3: really a topic of conversation, cooking and recipes and meals,
Speaker 3: wasn't something that her and Simon really talked about. It
Speaker 3: wasn't something that they enjoyed talking about, and that was
Speaker 3: her explanation of why there was nothing to be found
Speaker 3: there by the prosecution.
Speaker 2: Yeah, she said that there was six thousand pages of messages,
Speaker 2: is what her defense barrister put to her in reexamination,
Speaker 2: and she said that they very rarely ever spoke, particularly
Speaker 2: about the meals they were preparing for themselves. She's also
Speaker 2: disputed some more of Simon Patterson's evidence regarding a conversation
Speaker 2: that she says they had at the Monash Medical.
Speaker 4: Center where she alleges he said to.
Speaker 2: Her is that how you poisoned my parents or what
Speaker 2: you used to poison my parents being the dehydrator, and
Speaker 2: he disputes that he ever said that. Now, Aaron Patterson
Speaker 2: maintained that he did say that, and that that is
Speaker 2: what led to her starting to think about forage mushrooms
Speaker 2: and then panicking in regards to that dehydrator. Now, going
Speaker 2: back to her children, as you mentioned before, she's disputed
Speaker 2: some of their evidence around what they had for dinner
Speaker 2: that night. She's also now disputed some of the evidence
Speaker 2: of her son, who said on the Sunday morning when
Speaker 2: she wasn't feeling well, she was having a coffee at
Speaker 2: the dining room table. She says that was a herbal tea,
Speaker 2: but that she basically thinks her son has misinterpreted this
Speaker 2: because ninety nine percent of the time she would have
Speaker 2: been having a coffee and he couldn't necessarily see what
Speaker 2: was in that particular mug. But going back to her
Speaker 2: children and what she says was this habit of foraging
Speaker 2: that she had from twenty twenty. She was really pressed
Speaker 2: by the prosecution on why her children didn't give evidence
Speaker 2: that they had seen her collecting mushrooms anywhere before.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 3: So during the trial, as we've already mentioned in earlier episodes,
Speaker 3: a video recorded evidence for the children were played to
Speaker 3: the jury, and that's what Aaron Patterson was asked further
Speaker 3: questions about in the last few days of her testimony,
Speaker 3: and it was around whether or not she had foraged
Speaker 3: with her children, where they'd foraged, how often this may
Speaker 3: have occurred, and Aaron Patterson told the jury she recalled
Speaker 3: that her children were with her at times when she
Speaker 3: would pick and forage wild mushrooms and believed telling the
Speaker 3: jury that her children may have been mistaken or may
Speaker 3: not have remembered that those things occurred.
Speaker 2: Here's a little bit more of the evidence as the
Speaker 2: jury heard it. It's voiced by actors playing at Rogers
Speaker 2: and also Aaron Patterson.
Speaker 1: I suggest that your children never knew you to pick
Speaker 1: wild mushrooms. Do you agree or disagree?
Speaker 5: Disagree?
Speaker 1: That's because you did not go foraging for non toxic mushrooms.
Speaker 1: Agree or disagree, Ah, incorrect. This is a story you
Speaker 1: have made up for this jury.
Speaker 5: Agree or disagree, disagree.
Speaker 2: One of the final topics that the Crown prosecutor covered
Speaker 2: off in the cross examination was the topic of phones
Speaker 2: and various elements about phones. The jury has heard about
Speaker 2: a number of different mobile devices that Aaron Patterson used
Speaker 2: at different times, and she was asked around some factory resets,
Speaker 2: and she says there's a particular phone which is referred
Speaker 2: to as Phone B.
Speaker 4: She says that she reset.
Speaker 2: That mobile phone on the fifth of August, agreeing that
Speaker 2: was well at the same day that police came to
Speaker 2: search her home, and that she then reset it on
Speaker 2: the sixth of August after it had been taken by police.
Speaker 2: That she did that remotely, but she did dispute when
Speaker 2: the prosecution put to her, did you reset this mobile
Speaker 2: phone while you were given some time to have some
Speaker 2: privacy and call a lawyer.
Speaker 4: During this police raid, and she said no, she didn't.
Speaker 2: She disputed the time that she had called the lawyer
Speaker 2: compared to what time the factory reset was being shown
Speaker 2: in the data and said no, that that wasn't during
Speaker 2: that particular time.
Speaker 3: Yeah, this is incredibly technical evidence at times, and there's
Speaker 3: a number of different phones and simcards that have been mentioned,
Speaker 3: so to try and break down the timeline and simplify
Speaker 3: it a little bit, Aaron Patterson agreed that she purchased
Speaker 3: phone as Sam Sung in February twenty twenty three and
Speaker 3: use that for a number of months leading up to
Speaker 3: quite close to the lunch. She told the jury that
Speaker 3: at that point the phone wasn't quite cutting it, and
Speaker 3: she decided that she wanted to use a different phone,
Speaker 3: and it was at this point and around the time
Speaker 3: of the lunch she said she also decided to get
Speaker 3: a new phone number because of some accusations that she
Speaker 3: says Simon Patterson was making and for her own safety.
Speaker 3: The prosecut you should know, alleged that she changed her
Speaker 3: phone around the time of the lunch soon after the lunch,
Speaker 3: because she knew that there would be things on that
Speaker 3: searches internet searches, perhaps researching deathcap mushrooms. Aaron Patterson strongly
Speaker 3: denied this, and she strongly denied that she therefore changed
Speaker 3: her SIM card for the same reason. She said she
Speaker 3: handed over the phone and the SIM card that she
Speaker 3: thought police wanted. She said that they didn't clarify with
Speaker 3: her exactly what they wanted, and she felt like she
Speaker 3: was doing the right thing. We do know that Phone A,
Speaker 3: this Samsung that was purchased in February twenty twenty three,
Speaker 3: has never been found, and it is Phone B another
Speaker 3: Samsung that was handed to police. Now, those factory resets,
Speaker 3: Penny that you just mentioned occurred as well. She was
Speaker 3: asked about three of those in particular right towards the
Speaker 3: end of her evidence, and she agreed that she performed
Speaker 3: those factory resets, But she says for a variety of
Speaker 3: different reasons. One was because she was purely changing over
Speaker 3: her handsets and in the process of changing over her
Speaker 3: phone number as well and resigning up to accounts and
Speaker 3: downloading apps and a like. But the final two resets,
Speaker 3: she said, yes, what were for different reasons, and that
Speaker 3: third one, the jury is heard was because she thought
Speaker 3: the police may have been silly enough to leave it on.
Speaker 2: Yeah, she said that final reset as part of her evidence.
Speaker 2: She wanted to see if it was still connected.
Speaker 3: To a network.
Speaker 2: And we'll go now to some of the evidence as
Speaker 2: it was heard by the jury. Here's a little bit
Speaker 2: of what the court heard from Crown Prosecutor Andette Rodgers
Speaker 2: and Aaron Patterson regarding what happened with these phones.
Speaker 1: You told police your phone number ended in eight three five.
Speaker 5: I did.
Speaker 1: That was the phone number of phone B it was.
Speaker 1: I suggest that that was a lie to the extent
Speaker 1: that that was not your usual phone number. Agree or disagree.
Speaker 5: I wasn't asked if it was my usual phone number.
Speaker 1: Your usual phone number was the one ending in seven
Speaker 1: eight three, correct.
Speaker 5: It wasn't until until that day, Yeah, the day before
Speaker 5: when I was changing all my numbers.
Speaker 1: After you factory reset this phone on to August, and
Speaker 1: I suggest it was to August. You only used it
Speaker 1: to make three phone calls.
Speaker 5: I don't know how many it was.
Speaker 1: Those three phone calls all occurred between around two pm
Speaker 1: on five August, when you were given privacy to contact
Speaker 1: a lawyer. Yep, you were happy to provide police with
Speaker 1: this phone phone b Yeah, happy to tell them that
Speaker 1: this phone number was your number eight three five correct.
Speaker 1: And I suggest you did that because you knew there
Speaker 1: was no data on this phone correct or incorrect.
Speaker 5: No, I did it because they asked for my phone
Speaker 5: and I gave it to them.
Speaker 4: It came to this point in the questioning, at the very.
Speaker 2: End of all of these questions that were asked about
Speaker 2: the different phones and devices, Nanette Rogers said to the court,
Speaker 2: I'm nearly at the end, and basically that people would
Speaker 2: be pleased to hear that, which got sort of a
Speaker 2: bit of a chuckle and a reaction in the courtroom,
Speaker 2: including from the judge's.
Speaker 3: She turned to the jury and Aaron Patterson and the
Speaker 3: judges she was mentioning this and that they may be
Speaker 3: quite relieved that she was getting towards the end of
Speaker 3: her evidences have been long days, Penny. The jury are
Speaker 3: given multiple breaks during the day, as are sitting at
Speaker 3: the bar table. But there was a little bit of
Speaker 3: humor in there right at the end of the day.
Speaker 2: And then things felt like they changed to being far
Speaker 2: more serious again. When Nanette Rogers said, now I'm going
Speaker 2: to ask you three final questions. She signposted it that way,
Speaker 2: and then she turned to the accused woman in the
Speaker 2: witness box, and this is what she asked.
Speaker 1: I suggest that you deliberately sourced death cap mushrooms in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three. Agree or disagree, disagree. I suggest you
Speaker 1: deliberately included them in the Beef Wellington's You served to
Speaker 1: Don Patterson, Gail Patterson, Ian Wilkinson, and Heather Wilkinson agree
Speaker 1: or disagree, disagree, and you did so intending to kill them.
Speaker 1: Agree or disagree, disagree? Thank you. I have no further questions.
Speaker 2: Now we'll be back after this with some more of
Speaker 2: what both the prosecution and the defense put to Aaron
Speaker 2: Patterson in these final hours regarding gastric bypass surgery. Now,
Speaker 2: in the final days of evidence, the listeners have already
Speaker 2: heard this that there's been multiple questions by the Crown
Speaker 2: prosecutor regarding plans Aaron Patterson said she had for a
Speaker 2: gastric bypass or gastric sleeve weight loss surgery. Now she
Speaker 2: conceded in an earlier part of her evidence that maybe
Speaker 2: it was actually liposuction or a different kind of surgery
Speaker 2: because it was brought to her by the prosecutor that
Speaker 2: this Enrich clinic she'd named in Melbourne didn't actually offer
Speaker 2: gastric bypass surgery. And Aaron Patterson said when she was
Speaker 2: initially bought that evidence that she was really quite puzzled
Speaker 2: because she didn't remember the suburb being the same as.
Speaker 4: Where she'd booked.
Speaker 2: But she agreed she had booked an appointment, it was
Speaker 2: for a pre surgery consultation and that had been canceled.
Speaker 2: Now as part of her cross examination, she was taken
Speaker 2: to her her medical records. These have been collected from
Speaker 2: three GP clinics, is what the jury has been told
Speaker 2: by the lead detective as part of this investigation covering
Speaker 2: the period of twenty twenty three. And Aaron Patterson agreed
Speaker 2: there was nothing in those GP records that referred her
Speaker 2: for weight loss surgery or specifically mentioned weight loss surgery.
Speaker 3: And we got to this point, Penny, because Aaron Patterson
Speaker 3: was being asked about her cancer and whether or not
Speaker 3: she had cancer, and why she was allowing potentionally other
Speaker 3: family members to think that she had a serious illness
Speaker 3: such as cancer or may need some upcoming medical procedures
Speaker 3: connected to that serious illness. Now, she told the jury
Speaker 3: in her evidence that she had been wanting to get
Speaker 3: weight loss surgery, but she was embarrassed and didn't want
Speaker 3: her family to know. So she'd gone out and researched
Speaker 3: this clinic, and in her evidence she named the clinic,
Speaker 3: and that then saw the prosecution bring in a new statement.
Speaker 3: And so Aaron Patterson was given this new statement and
Speaker 3: told to go away and read it over the lunch
Speaker 3: break and come back and be asked further questions about this.
Speaker 3: Now we heard that this was a statement, a police
Speaker 3: statement from somebody that was working at this Enrich clinic
Speaker 3: talking about the fact that they don't offer bypass or
Speaker 3: gastric bypass related surgeries. They don't currently offer liposuction, and
Speaker 3: they really only offer cosmetic procedures for skin, nails, and hair.
Speaker 3: And it was at that point that Aaron Patterson agreed
Speaker 3: that yes, she must have been confused or mistaken and
Speaker 3: that they didn't offer this gastric bypass related surgery.
Speaker 4: Here's a little bit of that evidence as.
Speaker 2: The jury heard it between Nnette Rogers sc and also
Speaker 2: Aaron Patterson.
Speaker 1: Now that you've had a chance to see and read
Speaker 1: that material. Firstly, do you accept that the Enrich Clinic
Speaker 1: does not offer, and has never offered, gastric bypass surgery?
Speaker 5: Yes.
Speaker 1: Secondly, do you accept that the Enriched Clinic does not offer,
Speaker 1: and has never offered pre surgery assessments relating to gastric
Speaker 1: bypass surgery?
Speaker 6: I do.
Speaker 1: And thirdly, do you accept that the in Rich Clinic
Speaker 1: only conducts examinations and procedures relating to the skin and
Speaker 1: its appendages such as hair and nails.
Speaker 5: I do.
Speaker 2: When we saw Colin Mandy sc get up for his
Speaker 2: re examination, which happens after we heard a little bit
Speaker 2: earlier in this episode, Nanette Rogers say that she had
Speaker 2: no further questions. He immediately spoke about the gastric bypass
Speaker 2: surgery and the plans for that, And in that Colin
Speaker 2: Mandy told the jury that his instructors, the lawyers that
Speaker 2: help him, had gone and as part of this got
Speaker 2: a little bit more information.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they did a web search, is what the jury
Speaker 3: were told. And in that web search he explained that
Speaker 3: liposuction was available back in twenty twenty three, when Aaron
Speaker 3: Patterson would have made that appointment. She says she made
Speaker 3: the appointment for the thirteenth of September twenty twenty three,
Speaker 3: but actually ended up canceling it a couple of days before.
Speaker 3: But yeah, so they don't offer liposuction surgery at the moment,
Speaker 3: but they did back in that twenty twenty three periods.
Speaker 3: So that was the clarification that Colin Mandy was seeking
Speaker 3: to make.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and he also took Aaron Patterson and the jury
Speaker 2: through some other elements from that website where it said
Speaker 2: that these particular clinic had moved suburbs from Armadale in
Speaker 2: Melbourne to South Yarra in Melbourne, and he's brought that
Speaker 2: to Aaron Patterson. He also took her through some of
Speaker 2: her phone records. It's saying he says that this showed
Speaker 2: she'd made the clinic, that the appointment at the clinic,
Speaker 2: and then also that she received a text message warning
Speaker 2: her that there was in the forty eight hour period
Speaker 2: if you want to cancel, you need to do it
Speaker 2: now or you'll be charged. And she agreed she did
Speaker 2: cancel that. Now here's a little bit of this evidence
Speaker 2: that was put to Aaron Patterson by Colin Mandy, her barrister.
Speaker 4: It's voiced by actors.
Speaker 6: It says live persuction with doctor Michael Rich. As of
Speaker 6: thirtieth of the sixth, twenty twenty four, doctor Rich will
Speaker 6: not be offering life persuction as a treatment option to
Speaker 6: our patients.
Speaker 5: Yep, I see that.
Speaker 6: What was your understanding about what was being offered by
Speaker 6: Enriched Clinic as of July twenty twenty.
Speaker 5: Well, I understood them to be offering life persuction, and
Speaker 5: I also believe they offered the full range of weight
Speaker 5: loss surgery treatments like the bypass and the sleeve. I
Speaker 5: think they're two different types of things.
Speaker 6: But yeah, why did you cancel the appointment?
Speaker 5: It was a difficult time. It was a very difficult time.
Speaker 6: And do you accept now from this material that you
Speaker 6: were mistaken about the fact that Enriched Clinic offered gastric
Speaker 6: bypass surgery?
Speaker 5: Yes, I was obviously mistaken. Yes.
Speaker 4: Now was more of the re examination.
Speaker 2: It was only around half an hour that Colin Mandy
Speaker 2: spoke with his client at the very end of her
Speaker 2: evidence in front of the jury. He asked her a
Speaker 2: multiple questions sort of on a few different topics, and
Speaker 2: those included per potassium levels and the questions that she
Speaker 2: had asked. She says of medical staff when she was
Speaker 2: feeling unwell on the thirty first of July, a few
Speaker 2: days after the lunch. Now, she told the jury that
Speaker 2: she had been tested for potassium around that time and
Speaker 2: that it was about two point six or a higher level,
Speaker 2: and that come the morning when she was talking with
Speaker 2: a toxicologist, that had come right back down, and she'd
Speaker 2: had two potassium supplements overnight in relation to those. She
Speaker 2: also was asked by her barrister about what's been called
Speaker 2: some of the cooler Master evidence. This is a computer
Speaker 2: that she says came from her son's room that was
Speaker 2: examined by police, and she explained that when she was
Speaker 2: being asked questions earlier by the prosecution, and she insinuated
Speaker 2: that maybe she had been using the computer at that time,
Speaker 2: maybe it was her children. She said she didn't really
Speaker 2: have an exact memory of that time, that she still
Speaker 2: didn't of seeing these I Naturalist posts or making particular purchases,
Speaker 2: but she accepts that she definitely could have been her.
Speaker 2: That she just answered in that way because she didn't
Speaker 2: have that exact memory. And then she also was taken
Speaker 2: to two other elements involving her children, and this is
Speaker 2: where she became a little bit teary. On one occasion,
Speaker 2: the defense asked her a little bit about a ballet
Speaker 2: lesson that she said her daughter had that she says
Speaker 2: she needed to go pack her bag for when she
Speaker 2: left the Lee and Gatha Hospital the first time, and
Speaker 2: she said that yes, she did definitely have this rehearsal booked,
Speaker 2: and her barrister took her through that it had to
Speaker 2: be canceled and have a look at these text messages
Speaker 2: that she says with her estranged husband canceling those, and
Speaker 2: that's when she became a little bit teary speaking about
Speaker 2: her daughter. And then she was taken to tie ab
Speaker 2: An area in Gippsland to the airport there the day
Speaker 2: after the lunch for her son to have a flying lesson,
Speaker 2: and again this is where she became a little bit teary,
Speaker 2: and in her words, she said that she didn't want
Speaker 2: to cancel on him because he was really passionate about
Speaker 2: this and he'd had a lot of canceled.
Speaker 4: Lessons and that she didn't want to disappoint him.
Speaker 2: But then it got again errand to a different point
Speaker 2: where things became much more serious and we heard some
Speaker 2: final things from the defense barrister.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: The judge turned at this point to Colin Mandy and says,
Speaker 3: does the defense close its case? Is this where we're
Speaker 3: at now? And Colin Mandy agreed, and here's some of
Speaker 3: the words that.
Speaker 6: The jury heard, and that closes your case. It does
Speaker 6: your honor all right, Well, ladies and gentlemen, that's the
Speaker 6: completion of the evidence in this case.
Speaker 2: Now, the jury has been told at the completion of
Speaker 2: this part of the trial, the completion of Aaron Patterson's evidence,
Speaker 2: that there needs to be some legal discussions, that there's
Speaker 2: some legal responsibilities that the judge has in the way,
Speaker 2: that he will give some directions later on to the jury,
Speaker 2: and that they don't need to be present for that,
Speaker 2: and he didn't want them to wait around. So they
Speaker 2: were told that they can go home for the day.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they were sent home earlier. There was a few
Speaker 3: smiles on that some of the juror's faces. Has been
Speaker 3: a long week and a few of them looked like
Speaker 3: they couldn't get up to get out soon enough. They
Speaker 3: have been told, though, what will happen next is that
Speaker 3: once these legal discussions have concluded, that they'll descend into
Speaker 3: what it called final closing submissions. The prosecution will go first.
Speaker 3: They're expected to take a couple of days where they
Speaker 3: sum up their case. Then the defense will take a
Speaker 3: couple of days, potentially one or two days to sum
Speaker 3: up their case before we may have another day off,
Speaker 3: and then the judge will give the jury what's called
Speaker 3: his charge, his instructions before they go out to do
Speaker 3: final deliberations.
Speaker 2: The jury was told to keep an eye on their phones,
Speaker 2: and they now have been told that they will not
Speaker 2: be sitting on the Friday, the final day of this
Speaker 2: particular week that we're recording, and that they're going to
Speaker 2: have a long weekend, so we'll bring you another episode
Speaker 2: when the jury.
Speaker 4: Is back in the courtroom.
Speaker 2: Thank you for listening to this episode of Say Grace.
Speaker 2: Please press the follow button in your app to get
Speaker 2: our next episodes as soon as we publish.
Speaker 3: For more reporting on the case, check out the Age
Speaker 3: and nine News in your browser or app store.
Speaker 2: We'd like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land
Speaker 2: that this podcast was recorded on and wherever you're listening
Speaker 2: to it now.
Speaker 4: Say Grace is created and hosted by me Penelope.
Speaker 3: Lesh and me Aaron Pearson.
Speaker 2: This podcast is produced by Genevieve Rule