Erin Patterson, a mushroom cook, is facing accusations of triple murder, but her defence lawyer, Colin Mandy SC, has contended that jurors should focus on the evidence rather than her alleged dishonesty. During his closing remarks in the Victorian Supreme Court, Mandy urged the jury to analyse the evidence logically, distancing Patterson’s false claims—such as fabricating a story about having a cancerous lump on her elbow—from the serious charges of murder.
He emphasised that the case is not about moral judgement and noted that Patterson is not being tried for lying. The prosecution claims that Patterson, 50, intentionally poisoned her former in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, Heather (Gail’s sister), and Heather’s husband Ian Wilkinson, during a beef Wellington lunch at her home on 29 July 2023. While Don, Gail, and Heather tragically died after the meal, Ian survived. Patterson has pleaded not guilty to three counts of murder and one of attempted murder.
Mandy argued that suggesting the cancer lie was a ploy to host her guests is illogical because the deception was revealed after they had already consumed the food. He pointed out that if it were a ruse, there would have been no reason to mention the cancer after the meal took place.
While acknowledging Patterson’s lie was unwise, Mandy explained that it stemmed from her embarrassment regarding weight-loss surgery plans, although she never proceeded with the surgery itself. He clarified that she had an appointment at a clinic for liposuction. The barrister also touched on a December 2022 argument between Patterson and her ex-husband about child support and some heated comments she made on Facebook about her in-laws, including statements expressing distress over her family situation.
Mandy insisted that these remarks were not reflective of Patterson’s overall relationship with her in-laws, who were described as supportive and close. He maintained that the comments she made were isolated incidents driven by temporary frustration. Furthermore, he urged the jury to avoid hindsight bias in their deliberation, reminding them that such perspectives could lead to irrelevant speculation regarding her actions and intentions.
In conclusion, the defence is calling for a rational examination of the evidence without conflating lies with guilt in the matter of Patterson’s involvement in the tragic deaths of her family members.