“Shocking criminality” makes non-parole period inappropriate

COURT of Appeal judge, Justice Stephen McLeish, left no one in any doubt about what he and his fellow judges thought about the crime that not only shocked the small communities of Korumburra and Leongatha but the world at large.

When handing down the judgement on both the appeal by Erin Patterson against her convictions on three charges of murder and one of attempted murder, and the appeal of the DPP against the non-parole period of 33 years, Justice McLeish said “such shocking criminality” demanded denunciation in the strongest possible terms.

“As already noted, the applicant’s murderous intent dated back to the invitations to lunch,” he said on behalf of his colleagues Justice Leslie Taylor and Justice Peter Kidd.

“It persisted through the lunch when the poison was administered and for nearly a week after that, during which time the applicant repeatedly tried to hide the truth about the source of the mushrooms, even as the victims continued to suffer.

“This offending was extraordinarily cold and calculated and stands to be denounced in the strongest terms.

“Necessarily, we have given the question whether it is inappropriate to fix a non-parole period anxious consideration, in light of the gravity of such a conclusion and the different view to which the experienced sentencing judge came.

“But the features of the offending identified above lead each of us to conclude that this is a case of such shocking criminality that it is inappropriate to fix a non-parole period.

“This is not a case for the exercise of the residual discretion. It would be perverse to decline to resentence the applicant, having identified the need for proper denunciation of her crimes.

“Director’s appeal will be allowed on ground 2 (where it is argued that the sentences imposed on the applicant are manifestly inadequate). The non-parole period fixed by the judge will be set aside, and in its place, it will be ordered that the Court considers that the nature of the offences makes it inappropriate to fix a non-parole period.”

Justice McLeish also addressed the seven grounds of Ms Patterson’s appeal in detail, dismissing them all.

The three counts of murder, where Erin Patterson’s in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail’s sister Heather were the victims, and the single count of attempted murder where Heather’s husband Ian Wilkinson was the victim stand.

As do the three life sentences and one sentence of 25 years, however, instead of being eligible for parole after 33 years, it is intended by the Court of Appeal that Ms Patterson will spend the rest of her life in jail.

The charges arise out of a family lunch at Erin Patterson’s Leongatha home on Saturday, July 29, 2023 where she served a meal of beef wellington, deliberately laced with enough death cap mushrooms to inflict a cruel death on each of her victims.

Ian Wilkinson, the pastor of the Korumburra Baptist Church, was the only one to survive, after spending most of his two-month hospital stay fighting for his life.

However, while the judgement of the Court of Appeal on Friday, October 30 seems to add an exclamation mark to the much-publicised mushroom murder case, esteemed former NSW judge Anthony Whealy KC, said on ABC Radio on Friday afternoon, that the convicted woman was likely to be granted leave to appeal the change to her original sentence in the High Court.

While adding that Court of Appeal judges were inclined to adopt harsher positions than a trial judge, he heaped praise on Justice Christopher Beale for the way he conducted a fair and complete trial under a blaze of media and public interest.

He said he provided every opportunity for the accused to advance every point that she wished to make in her own defence, saying the conduct of the trial only added praise to the Victorian justice system.