September 8, 2025 • 16 mins
Erin Patterson was this week sentenced to at least 33 years in prison for murdering three family members and attempting to kill a fourth, by serving a lunch laced with poisonous mushrooms – closing a chapter in the saga that’s become globally known as the Mushroom Murders.
On this week’s Bloomberg Australia Podcast, host Chris Bourke speaks with Ainsley Thomson about why the case drew so much international interest, spawning books, podcasts and TV series. They also explore what fuels our obsession with true crime, and whether the intense scrutiny may have influenced Patterson’s fate.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
We start good news from Australia where Aaron Patterson, who
came to be known as the Mushroom Keller, has been
sentenced to life in prison.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Your total effective sentence will be life imprisonment and the
period during which you will be ineligible for parole will
be a very substantiate Aaron Patterson stood up and effectively
just took it, copped it on the chin, didn't really
show a great deal of emotion, and within a minute
or two she was escorted out of the room.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
The notorious Mushroom Murders have captivated the world in a
story that's compelling as any Agatha Christie mystery novel. Why
Can't We Look Away? And Who's cashing in on our obsession? Hello,
this is the Bloomberg Australia Podcast and I'm Chris Burke.
Today we're talking about the so called Mushroom Murders, which
(00:51):
this week saw Aaron Patterson jailed for life after serving
that now infamous beef Wellington lunch. Joining me is Ainsley
Thompson from our Wellington Bureau. Pure coincidence, I can assure you, who,
like much of the world beyond Australia, has been following
the case very closely. Today we're going to discuss what
this case reveals about the booming and sometimes troubling business
(01:12):
of true crime. Aisley, Welcome to the podcast.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Hi Chris, it's good to be here.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Second week in a row for you. I think last
week you were talking about everyone's favorite obsession, La Boo boos.
This week something altogether far more darker, a much more
darker obsession. Anyway, So on Monday we learned that Aaron
Patterson was sentenced to life imprisonment with no chance of
parole for thirty three years. For the handful of people
(01:40):
out there who haven't been following this case or every
twist and turn of this case, can you briefly set
the scene of the Patterson case, which has become known
around the world simply as the Mushroom murders.
Speaker 3 (01:53):
Absolutely, and I will be brief because most people do
know what happened. So it was back in July twenty three,
the end of July twenty twenty three, and Aaron Patterson
invited her estranged husband, Simon and his parents and her
mother in law's sister and her husband over for lunch.
And the reason was she was going to talk to
(02:15):
them about her health problem and discuss the best way
to break it to her children that she had cancer
or apparently had cancer. Her husband didn't attend, but the
other four did. And at the meal, she served them
beef Willington that Philip of beef wrapped in pastry with
mushroom in between, and she served it in four individual
(02:38):
five in fact individual servings. Four of them were served
on gray plates and her one was served on an
orange plate. And by that evening the four guests were
extremely ill. By the morning they were in hospital. Three
of them went on today. Only Ian Wilkinson survived.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
You know, one thing that I closely wandered throughout this
whole case was how could how could she actually believe
that she would get away with with such an obvious crime?
I mean, is that uncertainty part of what drew so
many people?
Speaker 3 (03:09):
And do you think absolutely? I think that is really
part of what caused this huge interest in this case,
the fact that someone could you know, there was no
one else who could have done it except her. She
cooked the meal, so you know it was it was
her who put mushrooms of some description in there. So
(03:30):
you know the fact that she maintained her innocence the
whole way through, including eight days on the stand. That
that just you know, sowed the seed of doubt in
people's mind that, you know, what was her motive? That
was always the big question, what was her motive? Why
did she do this?
Speaker 1 (03:49):
I love how you've described this as Agatha Christie meets
Australian suburbia. Why do you think this case did strike
such a cord globally? I mean everyone, media all over
the world has been covering this absolutely.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
I mean it really did draw attention from over the
from you know, the world over. And I think the
setting was a big part of it. I talked to
Xanthey Mallett, who is an associate professor and criminologist at
Central Queensland University, and she was saying, it's that jarring
position of this, this lovely rural setting, this little town,
and this very unexpected and violent death happened. Deaths in
(04:26):
fact happened there, and that really drew people in. It's
it's it is, it is unexpected, and I think there
is that slight Agatha Christie elegment to it. That's set
up of the you know, the dining room, the limited scene,
the four victims, they were all closely connected, you know.
And then this exotic murder weapon of death cap mushrooms,
(04:49):
which was just, you know, bizarre. No one had heard
of it, of them being used in this way before,
and that really drew people in. And I think, to
my mind also the big thing is Aaron Patterson herself
a lot of people point to. In fact, Gil Marsden
I spoke to her is making a documentary about about
(05:09):
these murders. He was saying that that moment where where
Aaron gave that interview to the media, everyone knows what
I'm talking about. Probably who's ever have seen any part
of this case. They always show this coverage of her
standing next to her car and kind of crying, and
her emotional reaction was unusual, and I think that immediately
(05:32):
people were kind of like, ha, what's going on here?
It was once again, it was jarring. It wasn't what
we expected. As Xanthy Mallett said to me, that doesn't
make someone guilty, but it does kind of, you know,
create this interest in the case and people are kind
of looking at it more closely, wondering what's going on here.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
And you're in New Zealand, obviously, what's the coverage been
like there is everyone pretty much obsessed there as well.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
I think so yes. I mean, as I said, like
people just haven't seen a case like this before. And
the fact that it's family, it's you know, her parents
in law were involved. It's absolutely you know, it's been
fascinating to people to hear the the sentencing and all
the comments made by the judge. There was, you know,
was quite chilling hearing a lot of those details, I think.
Speaker 1 (06:20):
And you are you have a very insightful essay that's
come out this week which which looks very closely at
how this case has become such a global spectacle, if
you like, you know, an entire as you say in
this essay, an entire media ecosystem has sprung up around
the case. What's in the works.
Speaker 3 (06:41):
There's a lot coming out, as I said, Gil Marsden
has got a documentary coming out on the fourteenth of September.
That's a three part documentary. There's already been quite a few,
like Current Fair style programs come out, the one hour specials,
et cetera. There are books coming out. Helen Ghana is
co authoring one of the books. There's been obviously countless articles, podcasts,
(07:04):
it's just, you know, there's so much appetite for to,
you know, to find out more about this, to try
and discover what her motive was, and to hear from
the people who were involved in the case.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
And that this kind of coverage was even referenced in
the sentencing on Monday, if you remember Justice Christopher Beale,
actually he referred to this kind of flurry flurry of attention.
Quote he said, given the unprecedented media coverage of your
(07:38):
case and the books, documentaries, and TV series which are
all in the pipeline, you are likely to remain a
notorious prisoner for many years to come, and as such,
remain at significant risk from other prisoners. So that that
implies that, you know, this, this unprecedented coverage weighed on
part of his decision to allow that parole after three years.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
I think so, I mean, because she is at danger
from there's other prisoners, because she is so notorious. She
has to essentially been in solitary confinement and she's been
in there and by herself for fifteen months, and it
sounds like awful conditions. I mean, she's hardly allowed outside,
she can't have access to the library, etcetera very limited
(08:24):
access to the library. So yes, that did weigh He
was clearly a heavily weighed on him and his decision
to grant the thirty three years, the non parole period
of thirty three years.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
Yeah, he went into some quite quite a lot of
detail about her small the small courtyard for example, that
she had access to, and the limited amount of time
she was able to leave the cell. And it became apparent,
I think as you were watching that the justice deliver
those comments that there was you know, almost a bit
(09:00):
of sympathy kind of coming out from him, and it
became apparent as he as he proceeded that she was
going to probably get a non parole, a non parole period.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
Yes, I think so. I think from memory he said
something like there's some convention, human rights convention where you
can only spend fifteen days in solitary confinement, and she
spent fifteen months. So you know what that does to
a person is, you know, it's hard to comprehend.
Speaker 1 (09:30):
But it's extraordinary that there's media coverage weighed on that decision,
and I guess that's, you know, something for all of
us to think about there, I guess, But is there
anyone who's actually going to be making money from this
in terms of this skin you know, we've got this
whole secondary economy as well, merchandise even TikTok slouths building
building followings off this case.
Speaker 3 (09:52):
Absolutely. I mean one person who definitely won't be making
money from obviously is Aaron Patterson herself. The process of
crime at to prevent that happening. But yes, I mean
there will be people who make reasonable money out of
what is going on out of these documentaries, podcast books etc.
Speaker 1 (10:12):
And when we come back, what does all this attention
on the Aaron Patterson case say about us? Welcome back
to the Bloomberg Australia podcast. You're here with me Chris Burke,
and I'm talking to Wellington based Wealth editor Ainsley Thompson
about the Mushroom murders case that's gripped the world and
(10:34):
what it says about our appetite for the grizzliest of news. Okay, Ainsley,
time for an awkward question. Three people are dead, including
a couple that had been together for about half a century,
and many lives have been ruined because of that. And
it's not just Patterson. If you look at the press,
it seems that Australians are frothing over the coverage of
(10:55):
Desi Freeman, a man still on the run after killing
two policemen in your neck of the woods. We learn
Monday that the notorious fugitive father Tom Phillips was shot dead.
You know, should people feel guilty for lapping all this up?
Speaker 3 (11:11):
That's a really interesting question, and it was, you know,
the central question behind the essay I wrote because I
wanted to find out I'm interested in these things, and
I wanted to know if I should feel guilty about it,
and do you I'm conflicted, definitely. I mean, suddenly my
husband always points out my grizzly interest in these things,
(11:34):
so you know that is not a particularly attractive quality.
But one thing I did learn after talking to Zanthey
Mallett and you know, just reading about the true crime
genre is that there are sort of sound reasons that
we are drawn to it as humans. It's about this
kind of wanting to restore I guess, a sense of
(11:55):
order where there's chaos, of trying to find out what
people's motives are about, you know, looking at the worst
part of society in I guess, a safe way, almost
a form of protection if we can understand what happened
and why it happened, maybe we can prevent something like
that happening to us. So I think that's part of
(12:15):
the sort of psychology of looking at it. Another thing
that is really interesting is that women are far more
drawn to this genre than men, and Xanthey Mallet said
she thinks it's because women in general are very interested
in relationships, relationships and what you know, what makes people tick,
et cetera, and that is why they are drawn to it.
(12:36):
So yeah, I did find that interesting to kind of,
you know, I guess rationalize my I wouldn't say it's
an obsession, Chris, but my interest in some of these
some of these subjects.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
That's that's really interesting, especially about women being the biggest consumers.
But is true crime? Is the true crime industry, you know,
is it on the rise? This this follow this popularity,
is it something that is it like a growth industry
if you like it?
Speaker 3 (13:06):
Definitely is on the rise. I think our modern media
environment really feeds it. Podcasts, you know the fact that
we've got citizen journalists even you know, things like Reddit
and chat rooms, which are really promoting this kind of
amateur sleuth type activity that is all definitely on the rise,
and there's you know, as we were saying before, there's
a huge market here in America. There was one study
(13:28):
which said eighty four percent of people over the age
of thirteen consume true true crime in some form, podcast
or TV or you know, wow in some way. But
it is a genre that's been with us for an
awfully long time. Daniel Dafoe back in I think it
was the seventeen twenties he started writing accounts of true crime,
(13:52):
and then we had obviously Jack the Ripper in the
Victorian period, which people were absolutely obsessed with. In the
nineteen sixties, it really took off with Truman Capote in
Cold Blood and he wrote that amazing book, which is
reporting but sort of done in the way of a thriller,
so it's a really compelling read. And since then there's
(14:14):
been various documentaries and books, etc. That have really gained
a lot of public attention. But I think the modern
period where it really began was the Serial podcast in
twenty fourteen, and that was just a huge hit. I
think it's been downloaded at least three hundred million times,
and that last count of three hundred million was back
(14:35):
in twenty eighteen, so it's probably far greater than that now,
So that really took it to that next level and
podcasts exploring this whole area incredible.
Speaker 1 (14:50):
Aaron Patterson this week learned that she would be in
prison for a very long time, at least until she's
in her eighties. I guess does this story end there?
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Well, I mean, we know that she can appeal, and
she may well do so, so we will have to
wait and see if that happens. As far as all
the media coverage, etc. Which is still to come out, No,
the story most certainly does not end there, and I'm
sure will be explored for an awfully long time. As
we were discussing earlier, that lack of motive, of really
(15:25):
clear motif, I think is what is going to keep
it alive. People are going to keep trying to work
out what happened there and why on earth she did this.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
So I guess the real answer to that question is no.
The coverage of this story seems like it's only just beginning.
Ainsley Thompson, thank you for appearing on the Bloomberg Australia podcast.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Thanks Chris.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
This episode was recorded on the traditional lands of the
wurundry People. It was produced by Paul Allen and edited
by Ainsley Chandler and Rebecca Jones. I'm Chris Burke. See
you next week.
We start good news from Australia where Aaron Patterson, who
came to be known as the Mushroom Keller, has been
sentenced to life in prison.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Your total effective sentence will be life imprisonment and the
period during which you will be ineligible for parole will
be a very substantiate Aaron Patterson stood up and effectively
just took it, copped it on the chin, didn't really
show a great deal of emotion, and within a minute
or two she was escorted out of the room.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
The notorious Mushroom Murders have captivated the world in a
story that's compelling as any Agatha Christie mystery novel. Why
Can't We Look Away? And Who's cashing in on our obsession? Hello,
this is the Bloomberg Australia Podcast and I'm Chris Burke.
Today we're talking about the so called Mushroom Murders, which
(00:51):
this week saw Aaron Patterson jailed for life after serving
that now infamous beef Wellington lunch. Joining me is Ainsley
Thompson from our Wellington Bureau. Pure coincidence, I can assure you, who,
like much of the world beyond Australia, has been following
the case very closely. Today we're going to discuss what
this case reveals about the booming and sometimes troubling business
(01:12):
of true crime. Aisley, Welcome to the podcast.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Hi Chris, it's good to be here.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Second week in a row for you. I think last
week you were talking about everyone's favorite obsession, La Boo boos.
This week something altogether far more darker, a much more
darker obsession. Anyway, So on Monday we learned that Aaron
Patterson was sentenced to life imprisonment with no chance of
parole for thirty three years. For the handful of people
(01:40):
out there who haven't been following this case or every
twist and turn of this case, can you briefly set
the scene of the Patterson case, which has become known
around the world simply as the Mushroom murders.
Speaker 3 (01:53):
Absolutely, and I will be brief because most people do
know what happened. So it was back in July twenty three,
the end of July twenty twenty three, and Aaron Patterson
invited her estranged husband, Simon and his parents and her
mother in law's sister and her husband over for lunch.
And the reason was she was going to talk to
(02:15):
them about her health problem and discuss the best way
to break it to her children that she had cancer
or apparently had cancer. Her husband didn't attend, but the
other four did. And at the meal, she served them
beef Willington that Philip of beef wrapped in pastry with
mushroom in between, and she served it in four individual
(02:38):
five in fact individual servings. Four of them were served
on gray plates and her one was served on an
orange plate. And by that evening the four guests were
extremely ill. By the morning they were in hospital. Three
of them went on today. Only Ian Wilkinson survived.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
You know, one thing that I closely wandered throughout this
whole case was how could how could she actually believe
that she would get away with with such an obvious crime?
I mean, is that uncertainty part of what drew so
many people?
Speaker 3 (03:09):
And do you think absolutely? I think that is really
part of what caused this huge interest in this case,
the fact that someone could you know, there was no
one else who could have done it except her. She
cooked the meal, so you know it was it was
her who put mushrooms of some description in there. So
(03:30):
you know the fact that she maintained her innocence the
whole way through, including eight days on the stand. That
that just you know, sowed the seed of doubt in
people's mind that, you know, what was her motive? That
was always the big question, what was her motive? Why
did she do this?
Speaker 1 (03:49):
I love how you've described this as Agatha Christie meets
Australian suburbia. Why do you think this case did strike
such a cord globally? I mean everyone, media all over
the world has been covering this absolutely.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
I mean it really did draw attention from over the
from you know, the world over. And I think the
setting was a big part of it. I talked to
Xanthey Mallett, who is an associate professor and criminologist at
Central Queensland University, and she was saying, it's that jarring
position of this, this lovely rural setting, this little town,
and this very unexpected and violent death happened. Deaths in
(04:26):
fact happened there, and that really drew people in. It's
it's it is, it is unexpected, and I think there
is that slight Agatha Christie elegment to it. That's set
up of the you know, the dining room, the limited scene,
the four victims, they were all closely connected, you know.
And then this exotic murder weapon of death cap mushrooms,
(04:49):
which was just, you know, bizarre. No one had heard
of it, of them being used in this way before,
and that really drew people in. And I think, to
my mind also the big thing is Aaron Patterson herself
a lot of people point to. In fact, Gil Marsden
I spoke to her is making a documentary about about
(05:09):
these murders. He was saying that that moment where where
Aaron gave that interview to the media, everyone knows what
I'm talking about. Probably who's ever have seen any part
of this case. They always show this coverage of her
standing next to her car and kind of crying, and
her emotional reaction was unusual, and I think that immediately
(05:32):
people were kind of like, ha, what's going on here?
It was once again, it was jarring. It wasn't what
we expected. As Xanthy Mallett said to me, that doesn't
make someone guilty, but it does kind of, you know,
create this interest in the case and people are kind
of looking at it more closely, wondering what's going on here.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
And you're in New Zealand, obviously, what's the coverage been
like there is everyone pretty much obsessed there as well.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
I think so yes. I mean, as I said, like
people just haven't seen a case like this before. And
the fact that it's family, it's you know, her parents
in law were involved. It's absolutely you know, it's been
fascinating to people to hear the the sentencing and all
the comments made by the judge. There was, you know,
was quite chilling hearing a lot of those details, I think.
Speaker 1 (06:20):
And you are you have a very insightful essay that's
come out this week which which looks very closely at
how this case has become such a global spectacle, if
you like, you know, an entire as you say in
this essay, an entire media ecosystem has sprung up around
the case. What's in the works.
Speaker 3 (06:41):
There's a lot coming out, as I said, Gil Marsden
has got a documentary coming out on the fourteenth of September.
That's a three part documentary. There's already been quite a few,
like Current Fair style programs come out, the one hour specials,
et cetera. There are books coming out. Helen Ghana is
co authoring one of the books. There's been obviously countless articles, podcasts,
(07:04):
it's just, you know, there's so much appetite for to,
you know, to find out more about this, to try
and discover what her motive was, and to hear from
the people who were involved in the case.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
And that this kind of coverage was even referenced in
the sentencing on Monday, if you remember Justice Christopher Beale,
actually he referred to this kind of flurry flurry of attention.
Quote he said, given the unprecedented media coverage of your
(07:38):
case and the books, documentaries, and TV series which are
all in the pipeline, you are likely to remain a
notorious prisoner for many years to come, and as such,
remain at significant risk from other prisoners. So that that
implies that, you know, this, this unprecedented coverage weighed on
part of his decision to allow that parole after three years.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
I think so, I mean, because she is at danger
from there's other prisoners, because she is so notorious. She
has to essentially been in solitary confinement and she's been
in there and by herself for fifteen months, and it
sounds like awful conditions. I mean, she's hardly allowed outside,
she can't have access to the library, etcetera very limited
(08:24):
access to the library. So yes, that did weigh He
was clearly a heavily weighed on him and his decision
to grant the thirty three years, the non parole period
of thirty three years.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
Yeah, he went into some quite quite a lot of
detail about her small the small courtyard for example, that
she had access to, and the limited amount of time
she was able to leave the cell. And it became apparent,
I think as you were watching that the justice deliver
those comments that there was you know, almost a bit
(09:00):
of sympathy kind of coming out from him, and it
became apparent as he as he proceeded that she was
going to probably get a non parole, a non parole period.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
Yes, I think so. I think from memory he said
something like there's some convention, human rights convention where you
can only spend fifteen days in solitary confinement, and she
spent fifteen months. So you know what that does to
a person is, you know, it's hard to comprehend.
Speaker 1 (09:30):
But it's extraordinary that there's media coverage weighed on that decision,
and I guess that's, you know, something for all of
us to think about there, I guess, But is there
anyone who's actually going to be making money from this
in terms of this skin you know, we've got this
whole secondary economy as well, merchandise even TikTok slouths building
building followings off this case.
Speaker 3 (09:52):
Absolutely. I mean one person who definitely won't be making
money from obviously is Aaron Patterson herself. The process of
crime at to prevent that happening. But yes, I mean
there will be people who make reasonable money out of
what is going on out of these documentaries, podcast books etc.
Speaker 1 (10:12):
And when we come back, what does all this attention
on the Aaron Patterson case say about us? Welcome back
to the Bloomberg Australia podcast. You're here with me Chris Burke,
and I'm talking to Wellington based Wealth editor Ainsley Thompson
about the Mushroom murders case that's gripped the world and
(10:34):
what it says about our appetite for the grizzliest of news. Okay, Ainsley,
time for an awkward question. Three people are dead, including
a couple that had been together for about half a century,
and many lives have been ruined because of that. And
it's not just Patterson. If you look at the press,
it seems that Australians are frothing over the coverage of
(10:55):
Desi Freeman, a man still on the run after killing
two policemen in your neck of the woods. We learn
Monday that the notorious fugitive father Tom Phillips was shot dead.
You know, should people feel guilty for lapping all this up?
Speaker 3 (11:11):
That's a really interesting question, and it was, you know,
the central question behind the essay I wrote because I
wanted to find out I'm interested in these things, and
I wanted to know if I should feel guilty about it,
and do you I'm conflicted, definitely. I mean, suddenly my
husband always points out my grizzly interest in these things,
(11:34):
so you know that is not a particularly attractive quality.
But one thing I did learn after talking to Zanthey
Mallett and you know, just reading about the true crime
genre is that there are sort of sound reasons that
we are drawn to it as humans. It's about this
kind of wanting to restore I guess, a sense of
(11:55):
order where there's chaos, of trying to find out what
people's motives are about, you know, looking at the worst
part of society in I guess, a safe way, almost
a form of protection if we can understand what happened
and why it happened, maybe we can prevent something like
that happening to us. So I think that's part of
(12:15):
the sort of psychology of looking at it. Another thing
that is really interesting is that women are far more
drawn to this genre than men, and Xanthey Mallet said
she thinks it's because women in general are very interested
in relationships, relationships and what you know, what makes people tick,
et cetera, and that is why they are drawn to it.
(12:36):
So yeah, I did find that interesting to kind of,
you know, I guess rationalize my I wouldn't say it's
an obsession, Chris, but my interest in some of these
some of these subjects.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
That's that's really interesting, especially about women being the biggest consumers.
But is true crime? Is the true crime industry, you know,
is it on the rise? This this follow this popularity,
is it something that is it like a growth industry
if you like it?
Speaker 3 (13:06):
Definitely is on the rise. I think our modern media
environment really feeds it. Podcasts, you know the fact that
we've got citizen journalists even you know, things like Reddit
and chat rooms, which are really promoting this kind of
amateur sleuth type activity that is all definitely on the rise,
and there's you know, as we were saying before, there's
a huge market here in America. There was one study
(13:28):
which said eighty four percent of people over the age
of thirteen consume true true crime in some form, podcast
or TV or you know, wow in some way. But
it is a genre that's been with us for an
awfully long time. Daniel Dafoe back in I think it
was the seventeen twenties he started writing accounts of true crime,
(13:52):
and then we had obviously Jack the Ripper in the
Victorian period, which people were absolutely obsessed with. In the
nineteen sixties, it really took off with Truman Capote in
Cold Blood and he wrote that amazing book, which is
reporting but sort of done in the way of a thriller,
so it's a really compelling read. And since then there's
(14:14):
been various documentaries and books, etc. That have really gained
a lot of public attention. But I think the modern
period where it really began was the Serial podcast in
twenty fourteen, and that was just a huge hit. I
think it's been downloaded at least three hundred million times,
and that last count of three hundred million was back
(14:35):
in twenty eighteen, so it's probably far greater than that now,
So that really took it to that next level and
podcasts exploring this whole area incredible.
Speaker 1 (14:50):
Aaron Patterson this week learned that she would be in
prison for a very long time, at least until she's
in her eighties. I guess does this story end there?
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Well, I mean, we know that she can appeal, and
she may well do so, so we will have to
wait and see if that happens. As far as all
the media coverage, etc. Which is still to come out, No,
the story most certainly does not end there, and I'm
sure will be explored for an awfully long time. As
we were discussing earlier, that lack of motive, of really
(15:25):
clear motif, I think is what is going to keep
it alive. People are going to keep trying to work
out what happened there and why on earth she did this.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
So I guess the real answer to that question is no.
The coverage of this story seems like it's only just beginning.
Ainsley Thompson, thank you for appearing on the Bloomberg Australia podcast.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Thanks Chris.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
This episode was recorded on the traditional lands of the
wurundry People. It was produced by Paul Allen and edited
by Ainsley Chandler and Rebecca Jones. I'm Chris Burke. See
you next week.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.