Program: Life sentence for mushroom killer Erin Patterson

Justice Christopher Beale: Erin Patterson, after a long trial, during which you gave evidence that the poisoning of your four lunch guests on the 29th of July was an accident, the jury found you guilty of three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder. On Saturday the 29th of July, 23, you served your four lunch guests individual beef wellingtons, which were deliberately poisoned with death cap mushrooms.

Sam Hawley: Erin Patterson, the so-called mushroom murderer, will spend at least the next 33 years in jail, with parole a possibility but not a certainty when she's in her early 80s. As she sat in the courtroom, the mother of two showed no emotion, often with her eyes closed, as Justice Christopher Beale handed down the sentence.

Justice Christopher Beale: Please stand. For the attempted murder of Ian Wilkinson, I sentence you to 25 years' imprisonment. For the murder of Heather Wilkinson, I sentence you to life imprisonment. For the murder of Gail Patterson, I sentence you to life imprisonment. For the murder of Don Patterson, I sentence you to life imprisonment. The total effective sentence is life imprisonment and I fix a non-parole period of 33 years.

Sam Hawley: Today criminologist Dr Xanthe Mallett runs us through what unfolded in the court and explains what comes next for one of the most notorious killers in Australian history. I'm Sam Hawley on Gadigal land in Sydney. This is ABC News Daily.

Sam Hawley: Xanthe, what a historic moment. This sentencing broadcast live on television, which is such a rare thing in Australia, isn't it?

Xanthe Mallett: It is and it's certainly the first time in Victoria, but I think it was important given the level of public interest.

Justice Christopher Beale: Having regard to the aggravating circumstances of your offending and the victim impact statements, I have no hesitation in finding that your offending falls into the worst category for the offences of murder and attempted murder. The gravity of your offending warrants the imposition of the maximum penalties for your crimes.

Xanthe Mallett: A lot was suppressed during the trial for, you know, legal reasons, which were totally sound, but I think there was so much interest that it was a transparent way of managing this process.

Sam Hawley: Justice Beale sentenced Patterson to three life sentences, of course, for three murders and 25 years for attempted murder and a parole period of 33 years. Now, was that expected?

Xanthe Mallett: Actually, I expected it to be higher. The Crown was looking for life without the possibility of parole. The defence had suggested a non-parole period of 30 years. They accepted, obviously, that the sentence was going to be a life sentence. But the judge initially started by reading all of the factors which he found to be aggravating. So the breach of trust was something that he highlighted. The trauma to so many people, obviously the immediate victims, but also the friends and family of those that died.

Justice Christopher Beale: Your offending involved an enormous betrayal of trust. Your victims were all your relatives by marriage. More than that, they had all been good to you and your children over many years, as you acknowledged in your testimony. Not only did you cut short three lives and cause lasting damage to Ian Wilkinson's health, you inflicted untold suffering on your own children, whom you robbed of their beloved grandparents.

Xanthe Mallett: But then he did speak a lot about the incarceration experience that Erin Patterson is facing. She's basically spent 15 months in isolation, and that's going to have a huge toll on her health. And given that that's likely to be continued going forward, she's very high risk in terms of being at risk from the other inmates because she's so high profile, that she is likely to remain largely in solitary confinement. So the burden on her of her incarceration is considered higher than if she could be released into the mainstream population.

Sam Hawley: So that's why he decided on this parole period.

Xanthe Mallett: Correct.

Sam Hawley: And of course there are UN guidelines for this. The conditions are really harsh inside the jail because, as you said, she's in solitary confinement and she will be, the judge says, for the foreseeable future.

Xanthe Mallett: Absolutely. And the UN suggests that people shouldn't be in solitary confinement for more than 15 days given the impacts on their psychological and physical well-being. And yet she's been in solitary confinement for her own safety for 15 months now with, in essence, no contact with anyone else. She's given meals through a small gap in her door. She doesn't speak to any of the other inmates. She's not allowed in her very small outside space courtyard that abuts her cell if there are other people in the larger courtyard. So she's really not communicating with anyone and that's going to be extremely difficult to deal with.

Justice Christopher Beale: I infer that given the unprecedented media coverage of your case and the books, documentaries and TV series about you, 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.

Sam Hawley: Now, Ian Wilkinson, the sole survivor of that deadly lunch, he spoke outside the court after the sentencing. He has been so stoic throughout this whole thing, hasn't he?

Xanthe Mallett: He absolutely has, but he made it clear that he had a statement and it was still a very forgiving statement. He started by thanking the investigators.

Ian Wilkinson, lunch survivor: They made a professional, efficient and effective investigation into what happened at the lunch. They brought to light the truth of what happened with the death of three good people.

Xanthe Mallett: And he thanked the public for their support as well. But, yes, ultimately, you know, he has been incredibly stoic. Imagine what that man has lost and suffered. And the judge did also outline that he has ongoing health issues, which you would expect, he was so unwell, that, you know, this is something that's going to impact him physically and emotionally for the rest of his life. And yet he stood there and read his statement to the press and, as I said, was very stoic, very together, and has ultimately been very forgiving from his own perspective as to what Erin Patterson and the pain and trauma she has caused him.

Ian Wilkinson, lunch survivor: I want to say thank you to the many people from across Australia and around the world who, through their prayers and messages of support, have encouraged us. Please respect our privacy as we continue to grieve and heal. Thank you for listening. I hope you all have a great day.

Sam Hawley: Incredible. All right, well, Xanthe, before delivering this verdict, Justice Beale, he ran through key pieces of evidence, including a child support dispute that Patterson had had with her husband, Simon, and really outlining her views of him and her in-laws that she'd actually shared on a Facebook post.

Justice Christopher Beale: You were scathing in your remarks about both Simon and his parents, Don and Gail Patterson. Amongst other things, you derided your father-in-law's suggestion that you and Simon get together and pray for your children, commenting, quote, "This family, I swear to f***ing God".

Xanthe Mallett: Yes so she was quite disparaging of Simon and his family at that particular time, although there were other posts that were much more positive. What really struck me about the summing up from the judge today was the breach of trust and the fact that she had an opportunity, even after the poisonings had taken place, she was still lying about the fact that she bought these mushrooms from a Chinese supermarket. She had the opportunity at that stage to say what she'd done, and the judge made a lot of the fact that she didn't do that. So medications and other interventions were not used early enough to really help the victims. Had she stepped in and said, this could be death cap mushrooms, the medical treatment would have been different and perhaps the outcome would have been different. So he believed that she fully still intended them to die, even in those days that followed, and that was very impactful on his sentencing.

Justice Christopher Beale: The prosecution submitted that I should infer from your pitiless behaviour that your intention to kill was ongoing and that this constitutes an additional aggravating circumstance. I accept that submission. As the Wilkinson's daughter, Ruth Dubois, remarked in her victim impact statement, you, quote, followed through on your lethal plan.

Sam Hawley: And he found there was substantial premeditation, you know, and absolutely no pity shown for her victims.

Xanthe Mallett: Absolutely. And remember when we had the pre-sentencing a couple of weeks ago, she had the opportunity to address her victims then. They'd read, oh, there were a number of, I think there were 20 or so impact statements that were read out to the court by those most, you know, intimately affected. And she chose not to speak then either, and that was her opportunity to really apologise for the harm and trauma she'd caused, and she chose not to. So there's no evidence at all of any remorse been demonstrated by Erin Patterson, and that's obviously something the judge would have considered as well.

Sam Hawley: Yeah. He also recapped Patterson's hunt for the death cap mushrooms, the cancer lie that she'd given as a reason for this lunch, and the fact that she'd used these different plates and served her own beef wellington on a different coloured plate.

Justice Christopher Beale: In addition to denying the use of foraged mushrooms, you engaged in an elaborate cover-up of your guilt. I find that you disposed of the four grey plates on which you served the poisoned beef wellingtons. You falsely made out that you had fed your children leftover beef wellingtons with the pastry and mushrooms scraped off. You feigned illness. You disposed of the dehydrator soon after you were released from hospital. You maintained the vague story about sourcing dried mushrooms at an Asian grocery and had...

Sam Hawley: It was quite really incredible to watch this, wasn't it?

Xanthe Mallett: It was, and also she was really trying to compel Simon to attend that lunch. I mean, she was really pressuring him by text when he had said to her, I don't feel comfortable attending the lunch. Thank you for the invitation, but I don't feel comfortable. And she put a lot of pressure on him, so she really wanted him at that lunch. And I think that, you know, looking back in hindsight, given what her intention was, that's really quite sinister.

Sam Hawley: The judge also mentioned that forgiveness that was offered by Ian Wilkinson.

Justice Christopher Beale: He offered you forgiveness for what you did to him. Quote, I encourage Erin to receive my offer of forgiveness for those harms done to me with full confession and repentance. I bear her no ill will. That offer of forgiveness presents you with an opportunity. You would do well to embrace it in the manner he suggests.

Xanthe Mallett: And I think what was really sad as well is at that lunch, I believe Ian led them in a prayer for her health, because at that stage they thought that she was unwell and that's why they were there. And that just seemed so heartbreaking, given the context of what she was doing. And the premeditation, she knew she was about to, in essence, kill these four people. That was her intent. And yet they're praying for her health. And I thought that really struck me as the kind of people they were, juxtapositioned against the kind of person that Erin Patterson clearly is.

Sam Hawley: Alright, well, Xanthe, let's look at the challenges that this case posed, because the interest in this trial was incredible. You're a criminologist. Why do you think people were, well, some people quite obsessed by this story? Even non-crime lovers were, you know, really taking a lot of notice of this.

Xanthe Mallett: Absolutely. It's got almost like a cult-like following now, which is I've never seen anything quite like this. And I think there's a number of factors. I think it's because it happened in such a sleepy, quiet little place, and that does not seem the scene that you would expect a mass murderer to be plotting this kind of tragedy. And I think it's Erin Patterson herself. She's a female mass murderer, which is very unusual, the only one in recent criminal Australian history. And I think the poisoning, and, you know, it's got this very Machiavellian, Shakespearean kind of feel to it. And when you look at her, she looks so normal. And yet, obviously, underneath, there's a very dark personality there that could plan something like this and go through with it, because she had so many opportunities to not do it. You know, even when they were sitting down, she put the plates in front of them, her food on a different colour plate. She had every chance to not do this. And yet she went ahead, and the judge did highlight the trauma she's caused her own children, you know, making them watch their grandparents die such traumatic and violent deaths. And so I think it's all of that, but when you look at her, she looks so normal. But obviously, you know, going on underneath, there's a lot of darkness.

Sam Hawley: Well, that's sort of mass attention as well. It does create a problem, doesn't it, for the judge presiding over a case like this?

Xanthe Mallett: It did. There was certainly a lot of public attention and obviously a jury, and that can lead to accusations that the jury is biased or prejudiced or bringing information from outside the courtroom into their deliberations, which they're not allowed to do. They have to only rely on information provided in court. But ultimately, I think that was highly reflected in the outcome. So she will remain in isolation in essence because she is so high profile, and that's going to be really burdensome on her. So I think the sentence was actually less than it would have been had she not been so high profile because he had to take that into account as a mitigating factor.

Sam Hawley: And, Xanthe, do you think that huge amount of attention on this trial ultimately was good or bad for the justice system?

Xanthe Mallett: Oh, that's an interesting question. I think it was inevitable because of the uniqueness and the elements of the case which made it, you know, so high profile in the first place. So I think that possibly the negative side here would be on the family because so much attention. It's going to be really difficult for them to get away from this now. And the judge even mentioned, you know, it's being talked about in the schoolyard. And so for the Patterson and Wilkinson families, I imagine that ongoing media interest, public interest has been and will continue to be very difficult because it will open those old wounds. So that's the, I imagine, the negative side of this whole media furore around this case.

Sam Hawley: All right. Well, Xanthe, let's now turn to what comes next for Erin Patterson. Just tell me, are all her avenues of appeal exhausted at this point?

Xanthe Mallett: Not at all. They've just started, really. So she has 28 days from today to lodge an appeal. And there are two types of appeals she can lodge, either one against her convictions or one against the length of the sentence. Now, if she's going to appeal the length of the sentence, it has to be because it's considered manifestly long and unfair. And I don't think that that is going to be something they'll consider here given the defence asked for a minimum of 30 years and she's got 33. So I don't think they would consider this a manifestly unfair sentence. They may throw it in because I imagine they may well appeal the convictions themselves because at this stage she really has nothing to lose. Most people seek leave to appeal, but they will need grounds. They will need to demonstrate that the judge erred somewhere legally during that court process. So seeking leave and being granted leave are very different things.

Sam Hawley: All right. And after that 33 years, that non-parole period, she will be given a chance to be released. What's the process there?

Xanthe Mallett: Well, yes, she will be eligible for parole and they will determine looking at her behaviour in prison, et cetera. The judge did also mention that rehabilitation wasn't really a large part of his consideration in this case, although normally rehabilitation is something that they will consider. But you have to remember, as you say, she's 50 years old now. She's going to spend, I imagine, a very significant portion of that in isolation. Physically and mentally that is going to take a huge toll on her. So I can't – it's difficult to imagine, you know, that she will actually finally be released. I'd be surprised, but ultimately if she makes it through those 33 years, she will be eligible and the parole board will need to look at her behaviour and all of the other factors at that stage.

Sam Hawley: Well, Xanthe, the appetite, the public appetite for this case, I assume it isn't going away even though we have got the sentence now.

Xanthe Mallett: Certainly not, no.

Sam Hawley: Now for the movies and the documentaries and, of course, all of that to come. And that was noted by the judge, wasn't it, during his sentencing?

Xanthe Mallett: Very significant public interest and I think that's the only point at which Erin Patterson did look up. When he said about the ongoing media interest and that being the reason she's going to have to remain in essence in isolation for her own safety, she looked at the press pack then and I don't think she was looking at them with favour. So, you know, it is going to be an ongoing situation where, you know, we certainly haven't heard the last of Erin Patterson and her story told by, I imagine, the people who have been impacted, those of whom wish to speak.

Sam Hawley: Dr Xanthe Mallett is an Associate Professor of Criminology at Central Queensland University. This episode was produced by Cinnamon Nippard and Jessica Lukjanow. Audio production by Sam Dunn. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. Thanks for listening.