Jury retires in mushroom murder trial in Australia
蘑菇谋杀案在澳大利亚陪审团休庭
The jury in the high-profile murder trial of an Australian woman accused of cooking a deadly mushroom lunch for relatives has retired to decide her fate.
备受瞩目的澳大利亚女子厄林·帕特森谋杀案审判陪审团已退庭商议，决定她的命运。
Erin Patterson, 50, has pleaded not guilty to four charges - three of murder and one of attempted murder - over the beef Wellington lunch at her regional Victorian house in July 2023.
50 岁的厄林·帕特森因在 2023 年 7 月于维多利亚地区的家中准备了一顿牛肉威灵顿午餐，并在餐中加入了毒鹅膏蘑菇，而被指控四项罪名——三项谋杀罪和一项未遂谋杀罪，她对此均不认罪。
The prosecution have claimed Ms Patterson knowingly put toxic death cap mushrooms into the home-cooked meal, before lying to police and disposing of evidence.
检方声称，帕特森明知将有毒的死亡帽蘑菇加入家常餐中，并在被警方询问时撒谎并销毁证据。
But the defence argue Ms Patterson accidentally included the poisonous fungi in the dish and only lied because she panicked after hurting people she loved.
但辩护方则认为，帕特森是无意中将有毒的真菌加入菜肴中，并且只在伤害了她所爱的人后才慌乱撒谎。
Ms Patterson's in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, both 70, along with Gail's sister Heather Wilkinson, 66, all fell ill and died days after the lunch in Leongatha.
帕特森夫人的公婆唐和盖尔·帕特森，以及盖尔的妹妹希瑟·威尔金森，都在莱昂加拉午餐后几天病倒并去世，当时他们都是 70 岁，希瑟当时 66 岁。
Heather's husband, local pastor Ian Wilkinson, recovered after weeks in an induced coma. Simon Patterson, the accused's estranged husband, had been invited to the lunch too, but pulled out the day before.
海瑟的丈夫、当地牧师伊恩·威尔金森在诱导昏迷数周后康复。被指控方的离异丈夫西蒙·帕特森也被邀请参加午餐，但他在前一天退出了。
On Monday, Justice Christopher Beale gave his final instructions to the 14-member jury, summing up evidence from the prosecution and the sole defence witness, Ms Patterson.
星期一，法官克里斯托弗·贝尔向 14 名陪审团成员进行了最后的指示，总结了检方和唯一一名辩护证人帕特森女士提供的证据。
After almost two months and more than 50 witnesses, the final 12 jurors were decided by a ballot before the group retired for deliberations.
经过近两个月和超过 50 名证人的作证后，最终 12 名陪审员在小组退席审议前通过投票决定。
In her closing arguments, prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC said Ms Patterson has "told so many lies it's hard to keep track of them".
在她的结案陈词中，检察官纳蒂特·罗杰斯 SC 表示，帕特森女士“撒了太多谎，几乎难以数清。”
The prosecution alleged Ms Patterson lied to her relatives about a cancer diagnosis to convince them to attend the fatal lunch, poisoned them and then faked an illness to cover her tracks.
检方指控帕特森女士在向亲属隐瞒癌症诊断的情况下，说服他们参加致命午餐，然后毒害了他们，并假装生病来掩盖自己的行径。
Ms Patterson's further lies to police and medical staff about foraging for wild mushrooms, as well as her decision to dump a food dehydrator used to prepare the meal, were evidence of her guilt, they argued.
"She has told lies upon lies because she knew the truth would implicate her," Nanette Rogers said.
"When she knew her lies had been uncovered, she came up with a carefully constructed narrative to fit with the evidence – almost."
There was no "particular motive" for the alleged crime, Dr Rogers told the court, but the jury should still have "no difficulty" in rejecting the argument "this was all a horrible foraging accident".
However, the defence argued the lack of motive was key. Ms Patterson had no reason to kill her guests, they said.
During Ms Patterson's evidence, she told the jury she was very close to her in-laws and never intended to harm them.
As she was preparing the lunch, Ms Patterson claimed she added mushrooms from a container in her pantry that she now realised may have included both store-bought and foraged mushrooms.
She also told the court she had suffered from bulimia for years, and had made herself throw up after the beef Wellington meal - something her defence team says explains why she did not become as sick as the others who ate it.
The lie about having cancer was because she was embarrassed about plans to get weight-loss surgery, Ms Patterson said, and she didn't tell authorities the truth about her mushroom foraging hobby because she feared they might blame her for making her relatives sick.
"She's not on trial for lying," defence lawyer Colin Mandy SC, "this is not a court of moral judgment".
He accused the prosecution of trying to force "puzzle pieces" of evidence together, "stretching interpretations, ignoring alternative explanations because they don't align perfectly with the narrative".
In his final instructions, Justice Beale told the jury members they alone are the "judges of the facts in this case".
He said they should not convict Ms Patterson simply for lying, as there are "all sorts of reasons why a person might behave in a way that makes the person look guilty".
He added that while "any reasonable person would feel great sympathy" for the Patterson and Wilkinson families, jurors also must not allow themselves to be swayed by emotions.
The jury has now been sequestered, which means that while they deliberate, they will stay in supervised accommodation where they will have little to no contact with the outside world until they have reached a decision.