Nine podcasts.
Under cross examination, Aaron Patterson is asked whether she thought she would never have to account for a lie about having cancer because she thought the lunch guests would die, to which she replied, that's not true.
Victoria's mushroom mystery, the mushroom lunch that claimed three lives an Australian family's meal is now the center of a homicide investigation. For bizarre tragedy now grabbing global headlines, Aaron Patterson's alleged victims died after eating a family lunch she'd serve them at her home.
I cannot think of another investigation that has generated this level of media and public interest.
Four of the guests of that lunch were much loved members of this church.
Only one will ever return.
People are feeling very heavy with having lost such wonderful people.
Today, Aaron Patterson remained here inside her home. She's continued to plead her innocence.
In a court room and country.
Victoria.
Aaron Patterson is on trial accused of using deathcat mushrooms to kill She's pleaded not guilty to murdering three of her former in laws and attempting to kill a fourth.
The town's church pastor.
It's up to the jurors to decide what happened when Patterson's loved ones sat down to eat. Aaron Patterson has begun her cross examination on the witness stand, and she's been taken through a number of different topics, particularly around cancer, mushrooms, what her intentions were with this lunch, and why she
invited people to her home. The cross examination began following two full days of evidence where Aaron Patterson was speaking with her defense barrister Colin Mandy in the examination in chief, and it has now turned to the Crown prosecutor, the net Rogers sc to lead off these questions. And she really fired a lot of these quite quickly, between different topics and different times and dates we've seen.
The net Rogers was ready and raring to go this morning. She rose to her feet and stood behind that left turn faster than I think I've ever seen anybody.
She had in her hands a number.
Of books and folders and pens and pencils and all of these types of things when she came into the court, sitting them down in front of her, and as soon as she rose to her feet, she took with her penny one blue binder, and inside that binder, as she opened it up, we could see pages and pages of pages in there which were the notes that she was using to help direct her questioning of the accused woman. And one of the major topics we heard about today
during that cross examination was cancer. This is something that Nannette asked question after question after question about for various different reasons.
She was trying to track what she said were.
A string of lies that Aaron Patterson told before, during, and after the lunch when it came to speaking and having conversations with her friends and family. And one of the phrases that she used when she was asking Aaron Patterson about this was this cancer lie, this alleged ploy to bring the guests together on that lunch to tell them that she had been diagnosed with cancer.
Penny, But that's not what she said. Happened.
Aaron Patterson said, something very very different actually happened.
Yeah, So, through multiple parts of this questioning, Aaron Patterson denied that she had told her lunch guest that she'd been diagnosed with cancer. That was the denial she kept coming back to, saying, that's incorrect, that's untrue.
When it was put to her.
She was asked about in Ian Wilkinson's evidence that he had said that she had mentioned a cancer diagnosis at this lunch, that she'd talked about a type of scan that may have picked up a tumor, and she rebutted that, saying that no, she had not told these lunch guests she had been diagnosed with cancer.
What she did agree to was she.
Wanted the lunch guests to believe that she was going to have some cancer treatment. Now this as part of this evidence, she was taken back and forth to the different text messages she was sending members of the family at different times, and different things she was saying about her health and tests she was undergoing.
She was explaining that she quite enjoyed the love and care that she felt from her family. She really denied that at that lunch she sat them down for one reason to tell them that there was cancer, but that there was any really real discussion at all about how to prep the kids to break the.
News to them.
And we also heard that Simon Patterson during his evidence that was something else that was put to the accused today. In his testimony, he recalled that his father Don Patterson, the day after the lunch had said to him, yes, while we were there, there was this conversation about cancer, possible chemotherapy, possible surgery, and also.
Plans to tell the children.
But when both of those witness testimonies were put to the accused, she said, no.
That was not her recollection of the conversations at the.
Lunch, and she was asked about conversations that she had with a child protection worker, Katrina Cripps as well, and when she was asked around where that she'd been, saying that she might have needed some advice on breaking something to her children, she said that, well, no, that wasn't the case. And then there was a part of the questioning when Nannette Rodgers took Aaron Patterson to what were
described as thumbnails from internet searchers. That's how Aaron Patterson told them, in her words, some snapshots or screenshots is what Annannette Rodgers was saying. They were that had been found on a device belonging to Aaron Patterson. And will take you through a little bit of this evidence as it was heard in the courtroom. This is Annette Rodgers sc while questioning Aaron Patterson, the accused.
It's no one's real voice.
This would allow you to tell a more convincing lie about having cancer.
I mean, theoretically that's true, but that's not what I did.
And you did this in your attempt to present to your parents in law and Heather Wilkinson and Ian Wilkinson that you had been medically diagnosed with cancer. Correct or incorrect?
Can you ask that again please?
You sought out this information from the Internet for the purpose of educating yourself about ovarian and brain cancer symptoms.
I did do that at one point.
Yes, yes, my proposition there's several, but the first is that would allow you to tell a more convincing lie about having cancer, correct or incorrect.
That was not why I did it.
Why did you do it?
Because I was concerned that I had a varying cancer. I was concerned that I had something wrong with my brain.
I suggest that you were educating yourself in an attempt to present to your parents in law and Heather and Ian Wilkinson that you had been medically diagnosed with cancer. No, that's not correct, and you pretended to have a legitimate reason to speak with them when you organized and held the lunch at your house on twenty nine July twenty twenty three.
I didn't give them any reason when I invited them. I just invited them.
Detective Epping still gave evidence and produced the diary of Gail Patterson. Can I take you to that please? You remember him giving that evidence?
I do.
Do you remember the exhibit? I do so.
On Wednesday, twenty eight June twenty twenty three, the entry appears Aaron Saint Vincent's.
Arm lump it does?
Do you agree that the reference in this diary entry is a reference to you? It is you told at least Gail Patterson sometime before twenty eight June twenty twenty three, that you had a lump in your elbow correct, correct, And that you had to go to Saint Vincent's Hospital for an appointment on the twenty eighth of June twenty twenty three.
Correct.
Correct, And by the use of the phrase Saint Vincent's you intended to convey Saint Vincent's Hospital in Melbourne.
Correct.
Yes, because there is no Saint Vincent's in Crumborough or leam Gatha.
Is there.
No, there's not.
You did not have.
A lump in your elbow on the twenty eighth of June twenty twenty three, that's true. You did not have an appointment at Saint Vincent's Hospital on twenty eight June twenty twenty three, did you correct?
No, I didn't.
When I asked about whether she had used a potential cancer diagnosis or health concerns to invite these people to her home, Aaron Patterson said no, that that's not the reason that she'd asked them to come over, and she disputed that that is the reason she had told Katrina Cripps that this lunch had been held, that child protection worker.
Yeah.
And Nanette Rogers when she was continuing to press Aaron Patterson really hard on this lie, this cancer con this
cancer lie. Well, you heard the word I suggest a lot today and a lot of Aaron Patterson's responses were yes, no, disagree, don't agree, and other times she would give longer responses, But in this particular one, Aette Rogers said that, you know, I suggest to you you never thought that this account, this lie about having cancer, would ever need to come out, because you thought all the lunch guests would die.
We'll hear a little bit of that evidence as it was presented in the courtroom. This is again Aaron Patterson and Anette rogers through the evidence.
So to sum up in relation to your so called cancer diagnosis, your claim to various people that you had been diagnosed with cancer before the lunch was deliberately false.
Yes or no, I didn't make that claim.
You told this lie. I suggest as part of your efforts to get the lunch guests and Simon to attend your lunch correct or incorrect?
Incorrect?
And I suggest to explain why the children were not present. Correct or incorrect?
Incorrect?
You knew you.
Didn't have cancer, however, correct, that's true, but you needed, I suggest, to appear to have a good reason to invite your guests to lunch at your house, because it was so out of the ordinary for you to do this. Agree or disagree?
Disagree?
Do you say that it was ordinary for you to have people over to your house for lunch?
No, it wasn't ordinary, and.
It certainly wasn't ordinary to invite Ian and Hea.
That was it.
That's true.
They hadn't been for lunch at my house before.
I suggest that you never thought you would have to account for this lie about having cancer because you thought that the lunch guests would die. That's not true, and your lie would never be found out correct or incorrect.
That's not true now.
Aaron Patterson also was asked a number of times, sort of a number of different ways about mushrooms and particularly her dehydrator and how she had used that dehydrator to dehydrate mushrooms, different things that she had told different people over the few months in the lead up to this lunch and previously. But she was also asked about what she had told the police in relation to this particular dehydrator.
As part of this.
The jury were taken through images again more photographs that we have seen earlier on in the trial, and they were of the dehydrator. We saw the dehydrator in various different locations. One was a photograph that the accused agreed she had taken of the dehydrator after she purchased it in April twenty twenty three. Does were of the dehydrata
in the tip. Aaron Patterson admits that the day after she was released from hospital in August twenty twenty three, she drove to the tip and she got rid of it, and she was explaining that because she agreed that she lied. She agreed that she lied to the police. She agreed that she was afraid that she would be held responsible when she was disposing of this evidence. And she also agreed with Annette Roger's assertions that her fingerprints had been
found on the dehydrator as well. She didn't deny any of that, but she did deny knowing that any deathcat mushrooms could have been prepared in that dehydrator. And she also said that no stag did she ever intend to pick, dry, or cook and serve poisonous mushrooms to her lunch guests using that dehydrata.
Yeah, we'll take you again to a little bit of this evidence now in the lead up to what the listeners are about to hear. As you heard, Aaron Patterson does admit it's an agreed fact in this case that the senior fingerprint expert found that there were three of her fingerprints, her index, middle and ring fingerprints on the back of this dehydrator once it was retrieved from the tip. So both sides of the bar table agree on that.
But as Ahnett Rodgers was taking Aaron Patterson through this particular part of the questioning, she'd sort of said to her, do you agree that this is your dehydrator? And the photos taken from the tip and Aaron Patterson said, well that she sort of assumed that it was and asked why that was by Nanette Rogers. Aaron Patterson said, well, if someone else could have bought a dehydraderl on too, I don't know that necessarily, And when that's when Annett Rodgers.
Really took her back too. Well, you have.
Agreed, haven't you, to the fact that your fingerprints are on this particular dehydrator. Let's hear a little bit more of what the court heard, not just in relation to the fingerprints, but the dehydrator itself as part of this police interview and other things.
Aaron Patterson says, she told the police.
You agree that they were your fingerprints found on your dehydrator.
Correct.
You took the dehydrator to the transfer station because you'd been using it to dehydrate mushrooms, hadn't you? Yes, And not just any old mushrooms, death cat mushrooms in fact, correct.
I didn't know that i'd done.
That, and you knew that they were death cat mushrooms that you had been dehydrating.
Correct.
I didn't know that, and you were very keen to dispose of any evidence which might connect you with the possession of death cat mushrooms.
No, I didn't know they'd been in it.
That's why you rushed out the day after your release from Munash to get rid of the evidence.
Correct.
No, you lied to police about never owning a dehydrator because you knew you had used the dehydrator to prepare death cap mushrooms to include in.
The lunch No.
I didn't know that.
You lied because you knew if you'd told the police the truth, it would implicate you in the deliberate poisoning of your four lunch guests.
Correct.
No, No, it's not true.
Now I want to go to the lie you told police about never dehydrating food Exhibit sixty three. Please in the record of interview that you participated in on the fifth of August, Question one six'. One all, right do you preserve foods or anything like? That, no have you ever dehydrated food or? Anything, no that was a lie that you told police about never dehydrating.
Food.
Correct, correct, because of, course you had posted messages in your chat group.
Earlier in the.
Year, CORRECT i did and told your friends that you had been dehydrating.
Mushrooms. Correct.
Correct the conversations With facebook friends were brought, up as we've mentioned a number of times in this part of the cross, examination and so was the evidence of some of the women who've told the court they became friends With Aaron patterson through a true Crime facebook group and then would have personal chats about various elements of their.
Lives and it was mentioned through this cross examination Particularly Aaron patterson was taken to what she had said to Her facebook friends regarding her use of her, dehydrator but also how she had been using that with the mushrooms when it came to preparing food for her.
Children, yeah mushrooms was another main topic of today in the line of questioning that we, heard And Nanette rogers was asking whether or Not Aaron patterson had used mushrooms previously in cooked them in.
Food she, said, yes she.
Had she agreed that, yes she'd use them before in meals such as muffins for her. Children and that's When nannette leaned into that little bit and, said, okay, WELL i suggest to you that you were testing at that, point testing how you could hide mushrooms in food without anybody. Noticing and the accused, agreed she, said, yes that's, fair that's a fair, summary but that wasn't her intention to
do that with any sort of deceit in. Mind it was more to try and get more vegetables in the meals for her.
Children, yeah and when we're talking about those particular, mushrooms we're talking about the dehydrated mushrooms that the court has Heard Aaron patterson had dried and then basically powdered down to put in things like brownies and some of the
other things that you. Mentioned and she said through her evidence that she, agreed, yes there had been a conversation at the hospital in the days after the fatal, lunch and that she had had a conversation both with her estranged, Husband, simon but also with the two children in the room where they were referencing these taste tests regarding.
Muffins and when she was asked sort.
Of about whether the children knew that those mushrooms were in the, Muffins Aaron patterson, said this certainly wasn't the first time that the children were finding. Out that they were just having a. Discussion she said in her evidence that she had told the child after they had eaten a number of these muffins or guess, what surprise were her.
Words it was a surprise.
That these were the muffins that they most enjoyed actually have mushrooms in, them because this particular, child she, says doesn't like. Mushrooms, now let's hear a little bit of as you mentioned What Nanette rodgers was Asking Aaron pattison about when it came to whether these other forms of cooking she'd done were.
A test and how did you blitz these mushrooms into a? Powder did you use A.
I THINK i used the.
THERMOMIX i suggest that you were testing to see how you could hide mushrooms in food without someone.
Noticing.
CORRECT i was seen IF i could put mushrooms into my kid's.
Food without them. Noticing. Correct, yeah that's.
Fair.
Yep the next screenshot so fun, fact the dehydrator reduces mushroom mass by ninety. Percent do you Think woollies would mind IF i brought the dehydrator into their vegetable section and dry things BEFORE i buy? Them you sent that message to The facebook user GROUP i did you knew the dehydrator reduced mushroom mass by ninety percent because you'd weighed the mushrooms before and after you dehydrated them to
see how it changed their. Mass, CORRECT i. Did did you research that aspect online or that was your own?
Experiment AND i think that was from my own.
Experiment you were interested in how much mushrooms weighed before and after being. Dehydrated, correct that's obvious from this.
Post.
Yes as part of this part of the, Evidence Aaron patterson was being shown not just spoken to about messages that she'd sent Her facebook, friends but shown actual particular screenshots of these, messages as well as being taken back to those photos of the dehydrator and asked whether she
had shared them with these particular. People and, there as we've, mentioned more of these mushrooms being brought back and forth in the photos that were being shown to the court and the questions that were being raised With Aaron patterson around those particular mushrooms on the dehydrated trays and what they actually.
Showed this came as the accused woman was asked about foraging as. Well these were two points that were really put, together and it started with her being asked about if you'd ever foraged for mushrooms in That april To july twenty twenty three. Period she said, yes but denied ever seeking out death cat, varieties and the way this was asked was, okay but so we've got these photographs now as, well and we've got these photographs that show mushrooms drying
on trail of a dehydrator at her. Home and she was, asked, okay you've said that you, forage but do you agree that these are death cap mushrooms on these? Trays, now these are different mushroom mushrooms drying on. Trays earlier we saw mushrooms that looked more like The woolies pre cut, variety but these ones were.
Whole you could see them from the.
Top they were almost an orange brown, color And Tom may had explained that they looked like that they were a few days, old And Aaron pattison had agreed as part of her, evidence but she denied that she ever deliberately picked death cap, mushrooms even when those questions were repeatedly put to her By internet.
Rogers are these death cup? Mushrooms do you? AGREE i suggested to you that they.
Are and then the questioning went a little bit further penny to other, photographs similar, photographs but this time it showed the accused drawing mushrooms on trays that had been placed on kitchen.
Scales and it was as.
Part of this element of the questioning That Aaron patterson was really being asked about what she might have been doing with those kitchens scales at the time she was Taken Byneret rodgers to all different photos from the police search of the home and also from these photos That Aaron patterson identified as being on her kitchen, bench about what she could see on the scales and what those
scales looked, like whether they were her kitchen. Scales and this is Where Nannette rodgers made a suggestion To Aaron patterson that again this was another kind of experiment perhaps these particular photos showed and will let you hear this evidence as it unfolded in the. Courtroom as part of, It Aaron patterson is also being asked about the area Of locke In gippsland and AN i naturalist post regarding death cap.
Mushrooms, now AS i understand your evidence before the, break you deny that these are death cap. Mushrooms that's your, evidence that's.
CORRECT i don't think they.
Are you don't think they are. CORRECT i suggest that you Saw christine McKenzie's post that she posted ON I naturalist on Eighteen april twenty twenty three about death cap mushrooms At. Lock you agree or? DISAGREE i. DISAGREE i suggest that you then went To lock on twenty Eight april twenty twenty.
Three do you agree or?
DISAGREE i don't know IF i did go to lock that day or.
Not i'm going to suggest that you went to lock on that day to find death cap. Mushrooms agree or, disagree, disagree and that these mushrooms in this image are the death cap mushrooms that you found At lock on twenty Eight april twenty.
Three agree or? Disagree?
DISAGREE i suggest that you were weighing these, mushrooms these death cap, mushrooms so that you could calculate the weight required for the administration of a fatal dose for one person agree or, disagree, disagree and the weight required for five fatal doses for five.
People agree or disagree.
Disagree we'll be back with more Of Aaron patterson's evidence after. This, now in another part Of Aaron patterson's, evidence as you've heard, there she denied that she had been in any way sort of weighing up these mushrooms to find out what amount would be something that could cause a person. Harm but she was asked outwardly By Etnanette rogers whether she had served her lunch guests these Beef wellingtons and that
she knew that they had death cap mushrooms in. Them she denied, that and she was asked a second question Whether Simon, patterson her estranged, husband had come to the lunch If Nanette rodgers alleged she would have given him a Beef wellington with death cap mushrooms in it. Intentionally, Now Aaron patterson replied to, that saying that if it had come to the, lunch she would have given him a Beef, wellington but that it wouldn't have intentionally contained
death cap. Mushrooms, now before we get to the end of this, Episode Aaron.
Patterson in the last, episode the listeners.
Heard she hadn't finished her examination in chief with her defense Barrister Colin, Mandy and this did happen on the same day that the cross examination.
Started but it was fairly.
Brief but she was taken through a number of elements of her evidence that she says and her defense barrassed to, say are.
Lies, Yeah these were questions that she agreed that she answered while being questioned by police in a record of, interview largely around the, dehydrator but also the string of lies that she told.
Police in the record of the, interview you were asked some questions about the. Dehydrator i'll just go to the. Document you were, asked have you ever dehydrated food or? Anything? Yes and your answer was, No? Yes was that a? Lie it? Was then question two hundred and sixty. Three the question ends with these, words what's that in relation to do you know anything about a dehydrator in your? House and your answer is, no. Yep and then question
two hundred and sixty, Four, no, okay do you own a? Dehydrator? No? No all?
Right?
Okay were those?
Lies?
Yes and why did you tell the police those lies on the fifth Of? August, WELL i.
Had disposed of it a few days earlier in the context of thinking that maybe mushrooms That i'd foraged or the MEAL i prepared was responsible for making people. Sick and then on The, Saturday detective Epping stall told me That gail And heather had passed. Away and it was this, stupid knee jerk reaction to just dig deeper and keep. LYING i was just scared AND i shouldn't have done.
It and in relation to foraging for, mushrooms you were asked some questions in the record of. Interview, Question, okay is that something you've done in the past foraging for? Mushrooms, yep and your answer was never, Yes and then question or anything like, that, never and your answer was. Never that was a lie, Too.
Yes they were both.
Lies and was that lie told for the same? Reasons.
Yes then she was taken through the prosecution case against. Her Now mandy laid that, out and then she was asked to respond to each of those different.
Points and here's a little.
Bit of the specific prosecution case Against Aaron patterson That Colin mandy sc was taking her, through line by line and her responses as they were heard in the.
Court, yeah he took her through question, answer question, answer question, answer very very very.
Quickly and it was right at the very end of his.
Evidence and we could see And At rogers sitting there on the other side of the lectern ready to get up and ask. Questions but this was the final thing That Colin mandy had to do with his. Client after a couple of days of asking her a lot of, questions he was quite calm and slow and quietly spoken in a lot of his. Questions but these were read very very, quickly and we'll take you through.
Them.
Now did you lie to people when you said you'd only cooked one batch of mushrooms for the Beef? Wellingtons?
NO i didn't.
Lie were all six of the Beef wellington's the? Same? Yes were each of the Beef wellingtons on each of the five plates that you served up the? Same? Yes did you lie about purchasing dried mushrooms from An asian grocer in The oakley area Of april twenty twenty? Three? No did you lie about using those mushrooms from The asian grocer in the Beef? Wellingtons NO i. Didn't did you lie about your children eating leftovers of the same
meal that had been served at the? Lunch NO i. Didn't did you pretend to be sick following the?
Lunch?
NO i.
Didn't the final thing that happened With Aaron patterson and her defense barrister before the cross examination began was she was, asked individually in relation to each lunch guest whether she had any intention.
To cause them, harm and she said that she.
Didn't she replied no to all of, them and as it was going through the, names First Donald, patterson Then Gail, Patterson Heather, Wilkinson Ian, Wilkinson Aaron patterson's voice sounded more and more, emotional like she was choking up getting out these nose that she was saying as she answered these particular, questions saying to her defense barrister that she did not want to cause the people harm and that she had no intention to do.
That there is one other part.
That will take the listeners to from what has happened in the, courtroom and that's what the jury has been told about the length of time this trial is going to. Take it is now nearly the end of the sixth week that we are recording. This, initially the jury was told this would be around a sixth week, trial but that has now.
Changed that has.
Just As Christopher biale didn't want to put a number on, it he didn't want to put a figure on how much longer the jury will be, therefore but he wanted to take them through what the next few weeks could look, like and it was weeks that he Mentioned. Penny he said he expects the accused to be on the stand
for another few. Days we have a public holiday coming, up so the jury won't be sitting on that, day and then to follow that there could be more evidence called once they find out whether or not that's the, case that could be extra time if that doesn't, Happen, penny he was explained to the jury that they next move into the closing submissions from both the prosecution and, defeat which.
Could take a couple of days. Each he said he then may need.
Some time the judge himself to finalize what he calls his, charge that's the directions he essentially gives to the jury before they go out to consider their. Verdict and he said after he'd made that decision and the time formulating that his charge itself would then.
Take a couple of days as.
Well so if we're trying to count numbers as he was going, along we're looking at another couple of weeks at this.
Stage, yeah that, certainly as you, said he didn't want to put an exact figure on, it but he wanted the jury to be prepared and to be able to understand that this is what is starting to happen.
Toward the end of this.
Trial he also noted that once the jury goes, out he, said, well then the shoes on the other, foot because it will be up to them how long they, deliberate he, said sort, of how's long is a piece of string in relation to, that and that they can take as much time as they.
Need so you AND i.
Erin we will be remaining in More well for quite some time to, come and we'll bring the listeners.
More as we, mentioned there.
Is a public holiday coming up where there won't be any evidence heard for a couple of days by the. Court but when we can bring you more of what has been happening inside the courtroom and this evidence in, detail.
We will.
Thank you for listening to this episode Of Say. Grace please press the follow button in your app to get our next episodes as soon as we.
Publish for more reporting on the, case check out The age of Nine news in your browser or app.
Store we'd like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land that this podcast was recorded on and wherever you're listening to it. Now Say grace is created and hosted by Me Penelope.
Lesh and Me Aaron.
Person this podcast is produced By Genevieve rule