We are pausing the live coverage of the Erin Patterson appeal hearing for today. We’ll resume tomorrow. Have a good day.

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 08:49

Defence and prosecution argue over jury sequestration

Erin Patterson’s defence argued today that the jury’s hotel arrangements created a serious risk to the fairness of Patterson’s trial, describing the shared accommodation with police and prosecutors as a “fundamental irregularity” and “catastrophic”.

However, the defence team accepted that there was no evidence jurors actually spoke to prosecutors or police.

The Crown prosecution rejected that.

Director of public prosecutions Brendan Kissane KC said there was “no substance” to the complaint and called the suggestion of a “catastrophic” failure unsupported.

“There is actually no substance to it,” Kissane said.

“Far from being some sort of catastrophic failure ... there’s no evidence in our submission to support this ground.”

Kissane said the evidence showed there was “no social contact between any juror and any other person”.

He said the jurors stayed on a separate floor and used a separate dining room, while jury keepers were responsible for preventing any improper communication with them.

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 08:45

In Pictures: Lawyers and mushroom lunch sole survivor attend court

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 08:19

What happened at today’s appeal hearing

The defence said excluding photos and videos of mushrooms compromised Erin Patterson’s right to silence by forcing her to testify about her previous foraging.

Richard Edney argued Patterson was questioned repetitively and unfairly, potentially diverting jurors from the prosecution’s burden of proof.

The defence raised 35 complaints about prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC’s closing submissions.

Edney said the appeal court could still intervene despite no application to discharge the jury at trial, citing the Greg Lynn case.

The defence challenged Facebook evidence and accused prosecutors of introducing a motive involving a child-support dispute that had not been properly put to the jury, calling it a “trial by ambush”.

Director of public prosecutions Brendan Kissane KC rejected claims that jurors staying at the same hotel as prosecutors and police was a fundamental irregularity, saying there was no evidence of improper contact.

Jeremy McWilliams defended the evidence, saying it helped establish Patterson had an opportunity to source death-cap mushrooms before the fatal lunch.

The hearing wrapped at 4.14pm local time. The Crown will continue its response tomorrow.

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 07:58

That’s it for the day

That’s a wrap for today’s appeal hearing.

The Crown has begun responding to Erin Patterson’s grounds of appeal, with prosecutor Jeremy McWilliams today defending the use of cell tower and iNaturalist evidence at her trial.

The hearing will resume tomorrow before Justices Leslie Taylor, Stephen McLeish and Peter Kidd, with the Crown continuing its response to the defence arguments.

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 07:26

Prosecutor defends phone tower and iNaturalist evidence in Patterson appeal

Crown prosecutor Jeremy McWilliams is addressing Erin Patterson’s second ground of appeal, which challenges the admission of mobile phone tower data and death cap mushroom sightings published on the citizen science platform iNaturalist during her trial.

McWilliams argued that the evidence should be considered alongside other material presented to the jury, saying it helped establish that Patterson had an opportunity to obtain death cap mushrooms before the fatal lunch.

McWilliams also went through some of this evidence in detail as he argued it was used appropriately in Patterson’s trial.

“No such argument was made in relation to the iNaturalist evidence in the trial,” McWilliams said.

“The response is that this evidence was part of a collection of evidence which, taken together, demonstrated that the applicant had opportunity to deliberately source death cap mushrooms at a time close to the lunch, and on the prosecution case, did so.”

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 07:09

Director of public prosecutions says ‘no substance’ to defence complaint about shared hotel

The prosecution has rejected Erin Patterson’s defence team’s argument that housing jurors in the same hotel as police and prosecutors compromised her trial.

Director of public prosecutions Brendan Kissane, KC, said there was “no substance” to the defence claim and no evidence that any juror had social contact with police, prosecutors or other people connected to the case.

“There is actually no substance to it,” Kissane said.

“Far from being some sort of catastrophic failure ... there’s no evidence in our submission to support this ground.”

Kissane said the evidence showed there was “no social contact between any juror and any other person”.

He said the jurors stayed on a separate floor and used a separate dining room, while jury keepers were responsible for preventing any improper communication with them.

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 06:45

Sole survivor of fatal mushroom lunch attends Patterson’s appeal in court

Ian Wilkinson, the sole survivor of the mushroom lunch, attended the Supreme Court hearing with members of his family as Erin Patterson’s appeal against her murder convictions began.

Patterson appeared via a video link from prison.

Wilkinson said he had forgiven Patterson for trying to kill him, but could not forgive her for the deaths of his wife Heather, Gail and Don Patterson.

At Patterson’s sentencing hearing, Wilkinson said he wanted justice for the three people who died.

“I make an offer of forgiveness to Erin.

“In regards to the murders of Heather and Gail and Don, I am compelled to seek justice.

“Now I am no longer Erin Patterson’s victim, and she has become the victim of my kindness.”

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 06:35

Defence accuses prosecution of changing case: ‘Trial by ambush is not permitted’

Erin Patterson’s defence argued that the prosecution changed its case “surreptitiously” during closing arguments by suggesting she had a motive for the murders that wasn’t outlined at the start.

The defence lawyer Veronika Drago says prosecutors relied on Facebook messages showing Patterson’s frustration with her estranged husband’s family and a child support dispute to imply she was angry with them.

“A trial by ambush is not permitted,” Drago said.

The judges, however, questioned why Patterson’s lawyers did not raise this issue during the original trial.

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 06:20

Patterson’s lawyers complain of ‘unfair’ cross-examination

Erin Patterson’s defence lawyer Richard Edney has argued that prosecutors subjected her to unfair and oppressive cross-examination during her trial in Morwell last year.

Presenting the fifth ground of appeal, Edney said the prosecution’s questioning of Patterson was repetitive.

“But also asking the applicant whether another witness was wrong, mistaken, or incorrect, in our submission, really diverted the jury from their proper task,” he said.

“The jury might have impermissibly thought or wondered why the applicant didn’t give an explanation, despite those directions that the jury got in relation to standard of proof and the burden of proof.”

Maroosha Muzaffar19 August 2026 05:53