Toxic Tests? Erin Patterson: School Fees and Signal Messages Centre Stage

The Mushroom Murder Trial Podcast provides updates on the Erin Patterson mushroom murder trial as it potentially enters its final week, with the judge set to give jury instructions on Tuesday. This episode features a detailed reading of Friday's court transcript, including critical cross-examination about Signal messages between Patterson and her former in-laws.

• Court proceedings could conclude this week depending on how long jury deliberations take
• Erin Patterson faced questioning about messages to her ex-husband's parents regarding school fees
• Prosecution suggested Patterson was angry when her in-laws declined to get involved in fee dispute
• Conflicting testimony emerged about whether Patterson consulted her ex-husband before changing their children's schools
• The case is formally titled "The King versus Erin Patterson" following the monarchy change

Join our newsletter at mushroommuridertrial.com for daily updates and further developments in this case. You can support our coverage by buying us a coffee for $5 using the links in the show notes.

Support the show

Instagram @Erin_Podcast
Twitter @lisapodcasts
Mushroom Murder Trial Website Facebook page

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hi and welcome to the Mushroom Murder Trial Podcast.
My name is Lisa and this couldmaybe be the final week of the
Erin Patterson murder trial.
We'll just have to see howthings go this week the jury and
the judge.
Of course they'll be in courttomorrow, tuesday, and he'll be

(00:21):
giving his instructions to thejury.
So it depends how long he takesand also it depends how long
the jury takes getting to averdict.
So let's see what happens.
It'll be very interesting.
But I've decided to this morningread you transcript of
proceedings from the SupremeCourt from Friday, the 6th of

(00:45):
June.
So that was the 28th day ofhearing and it's before the
Honourable Justice Beale and ajury of 14, and it's the King
versus Erin Paterson.
Isn't that weird?
We say the King, we were soused to saying the Queen.
I just I always have takenaback when I see that.
But let's move on.

(01:06):
And we've got Miss Patterson.
She's been cross-examined bythe prosecution, dr Rogers.
So his honour says good morningladies and gentlemen.
Jury.
Good morning.
Erin Trudy Patterson isrecalled.
Dr Rogers, I want to take youback to Exhibit F, which is what

(01:26):
I was asking you some questionsabout yesterday.
Yesterday afternoon I askedabout Exhibit F generally and
the signal messages between you,don, gail and Simon, and I
asked you this question, quote,and you essentially my word,
asking them to get Simon to payhalf the school fees.
Is that fair?

(01:46):
Transcript 242.
And you said, quote no, Iwasn't asking them to get him to
do that, dr Rogers agree.
Agree, you agreed.
In one of those messages yousaid you wanted Don and Gail to
encourage Simon to do the rightthing by his children.
Agree, erin's agree.

(02:08):
But you said I don't understandhow that phrase, that is, do
the right thing by his children,could be about school fees.
That was your evidenceyesterday.
Yes, I want to take you to pagethree of Exhibit F.
And you agreed yesterday thatthis was a message that you had

(02:31):
sent to Don and Gail and Simonon the signal chat.
Erin, yes, yes, I want you toread it out, please, starting at
thanks Don, please, starting atthanks Don.
Okay, erin starts thanks Don.
I understand your position andthat you and Gail don't want to
be involved in certain aspectsof these difficulties, as it's

(02:52):
very uncomfortable and awkward.
That's unfortunate, but it'sjust a fact in situations like
this.
I respect your position, but Iwill continue to put messages in
here on matters which I thinkare significant and for which I
think Simon needs accountabilityfor the difficulty he is
causing me.
I would hope that you, as hisparents, would be concerned that

(03:16):
he is making the decisions thatare in the best interests of
his children and not justoperating from a place of being
angry with me.
To that end, I will relay herefurther communication about the
children's schooling, as that isa very big issue.
I've had a number ofconversations with a school,

(03:37):
centrelink and the Child SupportAgency about this and would
like to report back.
Simon seems to be under themisapprehension that a child
support assessment covers everyexpense for the children under
the sun.
That's just not the case.
It covers basic care and basicschooling, son, that's just not

(03:58):
the case.
It covers basic care and basicschooling, including a public
school education.
If both parents want theirchildren to attend a private
school education, then they mustmake a private agreement
between them.
One parent cannot force theother parent to cover the cost
100% if they both want thechildren to attend the school.
So our choice is we either tellthe school we will each be

(04:20):
responsible for 50% of theaccount or, if Simon doesn't
want to do that and wants me tobe responsible for 100%, then my
options are to either take thechildren out of the school or
seek a court order requestingSimon pay 50%, which is likely
to be successful as long asthere's a long history and

(04:41):
evidence he wanted the childrento go to that school and has
been supportive of theirenrolment for years.
Finance Department has sent anemail today asking us to agree
on a percentage between us sothey can split the accounts.
We need to give them an agreeddecision.
You can end there.

(05:03):
That's, dr Rogers, because itseems to trail off.
Do you agree that the schoolingwas a significant matter and a
big issue in this message thatyou sent?
Erin?
I do, and that's why you sentthis message to Don and Gail,
erin.
Well, I did send them inmessage and I was concerned
about the schooling yes, and youwere clearly concerned about

(05:26):
the school fees.
Yes, that was one thing I wasconcerned about.
Yes, and the payment yes, drRogers, of the school fees.
Erin answers that's true.
So do you still seriouslydispute that you were
essentially asking Don and Gailto get Simon to pay half of the

(05:46):
school fees?
Erin, I don't think that's whatI'm.
If that's what I've beencommunicating to you, then I'm
communicating the wrong thing toyou and I need to be clearer,
dr Rogers.
Okay, let me go back to yourevidence.
Yesterday I asked you incross-examination quote and you

(06:09):
were essentially my word askingthem to get Simon to pay half
the school fees.
Is that fair?
And your answer was no.
I wasn't asking them to getSimon to pay half the school
fees.
Is that fair?
And your answer was no.
I wasn't asking them to get himto do that, erin, that's
correct.
After reading this page three,is it still your evidence this,
dr Rogers, that you weren'ttrying to get Don and Gail to

(06:33):
get Simon to pay half the schoolfees?
That's correct.
I was not trying to get them todo that.
I wanted them to help uscommunicate and mediate the
issue.
Don declined to get involved,correct that's, dr Rogers?
He declined to get involved inthe way I asked.
Yes, and the way you asked wasthat I wanted them to help

(06:55):
mediate the communicationbetween us.
Wherein go back to page three,in Exhibit F, is there you
saying that you wanted them toassist in communication?
Erin, I don't think there is inthat message no, or mediation.
That's Dr Rogers.
Erin, I don't think there is inthat message?

(07:17):
No, or mediation.
That's, dr Rogers.
Erin, I don't think there is inthat message.
No, dr Rogers, I suggest to youthat you were seeking to get Don
and Gail to influence Simon topay half the school fees, agree
or disagree, erin, I was tryingto ask Don and Gail to help
Simon and I communicate aboutthis better.
That's not my question, drRogers.
My question is we have versionsof the transcript that haven't

(07:42):
been edited, so sometimesthere's things missing.
So there's something missing inmy question.
Is Okay then the answer to yourquestion is no and Don declined
to get involved, correct?
To your question is no and Dondeclined to get involved,
correct?
Erin?
I don't agree with that.
No, I think he I need you to bemore precise about what you're

(08:03):
saying he declined to do.
That's Dr Rogers.
Erin, sorry, I missed it, drRogers, about what you say he
declined to do.
Because, dr Rogers, about what?
Sorry, I missed it.
About what you said he declinedto do, because it seems you and
I have a differentinterpretation of what I was
asking him to do Overall withthese.

(08:31):
Do you want?
Okay, so this is, Dr Rogers.
Do you want to have a chance toread these signal messages in
Exhibit F, erin?
No, I don't need to read them.
I've read them.
Signal messages in Exhibit F,erin.
No, I don't need to read them.
I've read them.
Dr Rogers, overall, is it theposition that Don declined to
get involved?
I can take you to specificmessages, but isn't that the
flavour of Exhibit F, erin?
He said he didn't want toadjudicate.

(08:52):
Is my understanding?
Yes, yes, but I'm not askinghim to adjudicate, dr Rogers, he
declined to get involved,correct, erin?
Sure, okay.
And Dr Rogers, and I suggestedyou were angry with Don and
Gail's response.

(09:12):
Erin, I wasn't angry with them.
At the start of term three,2023,.
You moved the children toanother school, correct, erin?
I did.
You didn't consult Simonbeforehand, correct, erin?
What do you mean by consult?
You didn't ask him or tell himthat you were moving them to the

(09:33):
new school, correct, erin?
That's not true.
No, when do you say you toldhim?
That's, dr Rogers, erin, theend of March, the kids and I
told him at the end of March Inwhat circumstances?
Aaron, in my house, he wasdropping one of the kids off
after an evening they'd spenttogether and we invited him into

(09:57):
the house and told him and hisresponse Aaron, okay, erin, okay
, simon Patterson.
So this is Dr Rogers.
Simon Patterson's evidence wastranscript 332.
I don't think we had anyserious conversation about this
child moving school.
Did you hear him give thatevidence, erin?

(10:24):
I did hear him give thatevidence.
Yes, dr Rogers, I suggest thatyou didn't have a serious
conversation about that childmoving schools, correct or
incorrect, erin?
Well, firstly, my memory is thecontext of his.
What he said there was that hewill discuss about.
It was about whether we werediscussing it in 21 or 22.
I could be wrong on that, butthat's my memory of the context

(10:44):
of that 22.
I could be wrong on that, butthat's my memory of the context
of that.
So, thank you for your time thismorning.
I will be back tomorrow withupdates on what happens in court
on Tuesday.
Thank you so much for your time.
Make sure you join thenewsletter
mushroommurdertrialcom and, ifyou would like, you could buy me
a coffee for $5.

(11:05):
That would be great.
Links for everything are in theshow notes.
But thank you so much for yourtime.
I really appreciate it.
Let's see what happens thisweek.
Hey, mmm, we shall see.
Okay, thank you so so much.
Bye.