The “extraordinary” amount of attention on Erin Patterson’s arrest, trial and sentencing gave the public a rare and useful window into how justice is administered, the Victorian Bar president has said.
All eyes were on Justice Christopher Beale as he sentenced Leongatha woman Erin Patterson to life imprisonment, with a 33-year non-parole period, for the murder of Gail and Don Patterson, Heather Wilkinson, and the attempted murder of Ian Wilkinson in August 2023.
Due to the aggravating circumstances of Patterson’s offending and the victim impact statements provided after the trial, Justice Beale said he had “no hesitation in finding that your offending falls into the worst category for the offences of murder and attempted murder”.
“As the case law makes clear, the fact that it is possible to imagine even worse instances of such offences does not refute that categorisation. The gravity of your offending warrants the imposition of the maximum penalties for your crimes,” Justice Beale said in the recent judgment.
Patterson’s trial attracted an extraordinary amount of attention, from the crowded Morwell courtroom and all the way up to international media. In conversation with Lawyers Weekly, Bill Doogue – whose firm Doogue + George represented Patterson – said the attention was the “sort of thing you wouldn’t see in a normal case”.
Although there are usually prohibitions on recording courtrooms, Justice Beale’s 46-minute sentencing was live-streamed by the Victorian Supreme Court, and media were allowed to broadcast it on their own channels. The video is still available to the public.
Victorian Bar president Justin Hannebery KC – the first criminal barrister in decades to have the role – said the public attention was “extremely unusual”, and he added it was likely because Patterson was a woman, the nature of the crimes, and her relationship to the victims.
But the attention was a “very good thing”, Hannebery said.
“It’s a great example for people to see how the justice system works,” Hannebery told Lawyers Weekly and referred specifically to the competence and decision making from Justice Beale.
“It’s very good for the public to see how the justice system is administered. Learning more about law is only a good thing.”
In his sentencing reasons, Justice Beale said he considered Patterson’s pitiless behaviour post-offending as an aggravating factor.
Hannebery explained it was these aggravating factors that made the offending “materially worse”. For example, Patterson’s denial that she laced lunch with death cap mushrooms – and by doing so put off the administration of an antidote – “elongated the suffering”.
Justice Beale noted the administration of the drug Silibinin – the specific antidote for death cap mushrooms – was done the day after the poisoning. Similarly, NAC was not administered to preserve their livers from the toxin until the following midnight.
“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,” Justice Beale said.
The only dispute Justice Beale addressed in his sentencing decision was regarding the non-parole period, with the prosecution having submitted that Patterson should “never have the opportunity” to be freed.
Patterson’s counsel disputed this because of the “harsher-than-usual” conditions of her imprisonment due to her notoriety.
Given the “unprecedented media coverage” and the books, documentaries, and TV series that are “in the pipeline”, Justice Beale said it was likely Patterson would “remain a notorious prisoner for many years to come” and would remain at significant risk.
These harsh prison sentences and the ongoing solitary confinement were “important and weighty considerations” that should “count for something in the sentencing exercise”, Justice Beale determined.
“Fixing a non-parole period is not to undervalue the horrendous nature of your offending. Your total effective sentence will be life imprisonment, and the period during which you will be ineligible for parole will be a very substantial one,” the judge added.
Hannebery said it was important to know that having a non-parole period “does not guarantee release at the time of the application”.
Patterson will always be “subject to that life sentence”, he clarified.
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
