Don’t ever go round this ladies house for dinner!

Resident said:
It's written in the article:



Pretty abysmal for the Aussie court system, over 18 months to bring a triple murder case to trial & then, even with strong evidence, take over 2 months to convict.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the lack of apparent motive was an issue?

I haven't followed the case closely, so maybe there was a lot more to it. But the bits I did pick up certainly made her sound guilty. Especially lying about how she got the mushrooms, and that she served her own dinner on an orange coloured plate and magically avoided becoming seriously ill/dying. Whereas her guests who received their dinner on grey plates were all poisoned.
 
Resident said:
It's written in the article:



Pretty abysmal for the Aussie court system, over 18 months to bring a triple murder case to trial & then, even with strong evidence, take over 2 months to convict.
Click to expand...
I want more depth. The detail about the plates Mr Badger mentioned is fascinating. I would love to hear her Defense for how that came to be. No matter how nuts it could be.
 
Last edited:
robj20 said:
Surely the fact she's alive is enough for it to not be an accident or she'd have eaten some wouldn't she?
Click to expand...

She claimed she ate the same meal but she ate too much cake and has bulimia so she made herself throw up after dinner.

But there are too many lies from what I've read, lied about buying the dried mushrooms from an Asian store that she cannot name or even give a rough area where the store is located.

Lied about foraging mushrooms, lied about buying and owning the dehydrator, they found it in a dump with her prints on it and with traces of the mushrooms inside it.

1 survivor remembered she had a different colour plates to the rest and one of the victims mentioned "she she short of crockery?"

She basically has no crediblity left in the trial, constantly lying. That alone usually doesn't mean its an automatic conviction as circumstantial isn't proof itself but I guess why it took so long. All evidence pointed to suggest she did it, she lied and she hid it, it just doesn't explain the why.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
I want more depth. The detail about the plates Mr Badger mentioned is fascinating. I would love to hear her Defense for how that came to be. No matter how nuts it could be.
Click to expand...

I think she just denied there were different coloured plates. That information came from the sole survivor, Ian Wilkinson, so it was a he said/she said but with all the other lies she is believed to have concocted to cover up her actions it was just another they didn't believe her on.

The fact they have her phone data showing she went to 2 places that had been reported to have DCM growing in, then bought a dehydrater 2 hours later (and denied ever owning one) then having CCTV of her disposing of said dehydrater at a tip a week after the event is just another of the long list of circumstancial evidences that pointed to her guilt.
 
robj20 said:
Surely the fact she's alive is enough for it to not be an accident or she'd have eaten some wouldn't she?
Click to expand...

Police found the food dehydrator in a dump with her finger prints on it, that alone would have convinced me she is guilty.
Classic case of lazy, stupid and careless attempt to dispose of criminal evidence. Literally just drove it to the dump.
 
Last edited:
Freakbro said:
I think she just denied there were different coloured plates. That information came from the sole survivor, Ian Wilkinson, so it was a he said/she said but with all the other lies she is believed to have concocted to cover up her actions it was just another they didn't believe her on.

The fact they have her phone data showing she went to 2 places that had been reported to have DCM growing in, then bought a dehydrater 2 hours later (and denied ever owning one) then having CCTV of her disposing of said dehydrater at a tip a week after the event is just another of the long list of circumstancial evidences that pointed to her guilt.
Click to expand...
Wow. That all seems quite premeditated.
 
This woman recaps part of the case but she looks at the recipe itself.

Seems like she needed 600g of mushrooms for the recipe, which is a significant amount to gather. They were out of season as well so she needed to collect them ahead of time.

 
Last edited:
I've seen dogs wipe their ass across a carpet floor and look less guilty than that woman.
And thats before we even start ripping apart her BS story that has changed more times than she's changed dehydrator's ;)
 
fi2J9MZ.jpeg
 
Obviously it's been quite a big story here. The ABC (Aussie BBC) did a daily podcast on it. Called the Mushroom case daily, 20 odd minutes each with a weekly wrap up on a Friday if anyone is interested., Its on Spotify and all that.

Because it was in regional Victoria, rather than the city, the court was very small so not every journalist was able to get in daily. Hence why the podcast was popular. When news broke I thought she was guilty straight away but I listened along each day and I actually thought she would get off with it. The bits of evidence like dumping the dehydrator and searching the web for death cap locations and all that seemed like it could be just circumstantial. The charges were murder x 3 and attempted murder x1. In the judges charge at the end he made the point specifically to the jury they must find her guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. IMO the defence threw enough in there to cast some doubt. When her QC summed up he told the jury that even if they thought she did it, possibly did it or could have did it then they must find her not guilty to comply with what the judge said. Had to be unanimous too. Thats the point I thought she would get off with it.
Fair play to the prosecution for going with the murder charge and sticking it. I quite enjoyed the whole thing, never really been interested in court room stuff or had any real experience of it. Judge is away on his holidays now so sentencing wont be for a few weeks. It's an interesting and quirky story, even amusing to a certain extent. This lady is 50, likely get life I'd expect and die in prison. A man has lost his wife and both his parents, 2 kids have lost their mother and grandparents and one old fella not only lost his wife he was also in hospital for months in what I assume would be acute pain mostly. He also sat through every day in court to see her lie to a judge and jury. There are a lot of lives ruined here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom