Patterson’s mobile phones
Rogers turns to evidence about Patterson’s mobile phones.
She says Patterson had a change in handset at the beginning of February. She continued to use this phone – Phone A – until after the lunch.
“This is what the prosecution says is the accused’s usual mobile phone,” Rogers says.
She says Phone A was still in use up to and while police were searching Patterson’s house on 5 August 2023.
Rogers reminds the jury the agreed fact that at an unknown time between 12.01pm and 1.45pm on this day Patterson’s original phone number – previously used for Phone A – “lost connection with the network”.
Rogers says this could be due to:
A. The sim card being removed
B. The battery being removed without the handset being off
C. The handset being damaged
Rogers says for any of these three things to occur someone – “and we say the accused” – must have been handling the mobile phone.
She reminds the jury that to this day police have never located Phone A.
Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC is continuing to deliver her closing address.
She says the day after Patterson was discharged from Monash hospital in August 2023 she drove to a local tip, Koonwarra Transfer Station And Landfill, anddumped the food dehydratorbecause she “knew it would incriminate her”.
She says the only reason Patterson did this was to cover up the deadly meal.
“She wanted to hide the evidence,” Rogers says.
“This is another example of incriminating conduct.
“She knew that keeping it would be far too risky.”
Rogers says that if police had not discovered the transaction from the tip then Patterson’s disposal of the dehydrator would not have come to light.
“Erin Patterson certainly wasn’t telling anybody about it,” she says.
Rogers says Pattersonlied to policewhen asked if she owned a dehydrator in the formal interview.
The jurors have returned to the court room in Morwell.
Here’s a recap of the what jury heard on Monday:
ProsecutorNanette Rogers SCtold the juryErin Pattersonmade “four calculated deceptions”. She said these were fabricating a cancer claim as a reason to host the lunch, secreting a lethal dose of poison in the beef wellingtons, her attempts to pretend she was also sick, and a sustained cover-up to “conceal the truth” after the lunch.
Patterson did not think she would be questioned about her cancer claim because she believed her “lie would die with them [her lunch guests]”, Rogers said.
Rogers told the jury to reject Patterson’s evidence that there were no grey plates she served the beef wellingtons on. She saidIan Wilkinson, the sole surviving lunch guest, was a “compelling witness” and recalled four grey plates. He said Patterson ate off an orange-tan coloured plate.
Not one medical professional who saw Patterson said she looked unwell, Rogers told the jury.
Patterson’s initial reluctance to have her children medically tested, after she told medical staff she fed them leftovers of the fatal meal, was because she knew they had not consumed death cap mushrooms, Rogers said.
Welcome to day 33 ofErin Patterson’s triple murder trial.
ProsecutorNanette Rogers SCwill continue delivering her closing address to jurors this morning. Patterson’s defence lawyer,Colin Mandy SC, will then address the jury.
We’re expecting the trial to resume from 10.30am.
Patterson, 50, faces three charges of murder and one charge of attempted murder relating to a beef wellington lunch she served at her house in Leongatha, in regionalVictoria, on 29 July 2023.
She is accused of murdering her in-laws,DonandGail Patterson, and her estranged husband’s aunt,Heather Wilkinson. The attempted murder charge relates to Heather’s husband,Ian.
She has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The prosecution alleges Patterson deliberately poisoned her lunch guests with “murderous intent”, but her lawyers say the poisoning was a tragic accident.