Simon meets his ex-wife Erin Patterson for the first time since she was accused of killing his parents with a poisonous mushroom meal

Simon Patterson has taken the stand to testify against his ex-wife, Erin. He described her as clever and smart while recalling their past life together.

It is the first time Simon has laid eyes on his estranged wife in person since her arrest over the alleged murder of his parents in 2023. 

Patterson, aged 50, is facing allegations of causing the deaths of her former in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, along with Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson. The prosecution claims she used poisonous death cap mushrooms disguised in a savory pastry during a meal at her residence in Leongatha on July 29, 2023.

Pastor Ian Wilkinson was the only attendee to survive the lunch, with Patterson also charged with attempted murder over his alleged poisoning.

Dressed in pink, Patterson showed no emotion as Simon entered the witness box.

The pair locked eyes briefly before Patterson began to give his evidence.  

Simon had been invited to the deadly lunch but pulled out the night before. 

The jury has already heard three attempted murder charges relating to him were withdrawn last week.

A smiling Simon Patterson appears at the Latrobe Valley law courts on Thursday 

Patterson has pleaded not guilty to three counts of murder and one of attempted murder.

Simon outlined how he had been invited to the fateful lunch and the angry response he received from his estranged wife when he declined. 

‘I’ve spent countless hours this week preparing tomorrow’s lunch, which has been particularly tiring given the challenges I’m dealing with. I invested a significant amount in Beef Eye Fillet to create Beef Wellingtons because I wanted the occasion to be extraordinary, knowing that I may not have the opportunity to host such a lunch for a while,’ she messaged Simon.

‘It’s important to me that you’re all there tomorrow, and that I can have the conversations that I need to have. I hope you’ll change your mind. Your parents, Heather and Ian, are coming at 12.30, and I hope you’ll change your mind. Your parents, Heather and Ian, are coming at 12.30, and I hope to see you there.’

Simon spent the early part of Thursday answering questions about his family and how he came to meet and then separate from his wife. 

He called his estranged wife ‘witty and quite intelligent’ before telling the court she had held a position as an air-traffic controller at Melbourne Airport in Tullamarine. 

He explained how Patterson had enjoyed educating herself, studying pet science, law and science. 

When asked if Patterson liked to invite people over to the family home, Simon said it was ‘very rare’. 

Simon texted Erin Patterson telling her he was pulling out of lunch

Simon became emotional when asked about the breakdown of his relationship, asking for tissues and struggling to answer questions. 

‘It’s good to be friends with the person you’re married too … it was really important to me that, sorry can I have some tissues please,’ he said. 

Asked for a break, Simon resisted. 

‘Did you continue to care for her,’ Dr Rogers asked.

‘Yes,’ he replied. 

Simon claimed while the couple remained friendly during separation, things changed when he made the decision to change his relationship status on his tax return. 

He had been dropping off the kids at Patterson’s Leongatha home when she allegedly came out and asked to have a chat.

The jury heard Patterson jumped in the passenger side of Simon’s car.  

Erin Patterson as she appeared in court on Monday 

‘She discovered that my tax return for the previous year for the first time noted we were separated,’ Simon told the court. 

Patterson told him the move would impact the family tax benefit the couple had previously enjoyed and she was obliged to now claim child support.

‘She was upset about it,’ Simon said. 

On July 16, during a church service, Patterson allegedly asked her in-laws over for lunch, the court heard previously.

She also asked Simon to attend, despite the couple’s relationship being on the decline.

The court heard the purpose of the lunch was to discuss ‘medical issues’ and how ‘to break it to the kids’.

Those issues were Patterson’s false claims that she had ovarian cancer. 

Patterson was insistent she did not want the kids to attend and Simon agreed to attend the lunch.

Simon Patterson entered court with his media cohort Jessica O’Donnell

Simon Patterson will be cross examined by his wife’s legal team (pictured) 

The court heard each of Patterson’s guests were initially confused about the invitation and wondered what the purpose was.

Simon pulled out at last minute because he ‘felt uncomfortable’ – a move which allegedly annoyed his estranged wife.

Patterson texted ‘she was disappointed’ as she’d put in a lot of effort for the ‘special meal’.

The court heard Patterson told Simon it was important everyone attended.

In opening the prosecution case, Dr Nanette Rogers claimed that, while separated, Patterson and Simon had initially enjoyed a ‘friendly relationship’.

Despite separating in 2015, Simon had remained hopeful they would reunite someday, Dr Rogers said.

The pair had communicated regularly via the Signal messaging app up until 2022 when Simon noticed a change.

Dr Rogers told the jury Patterson expressed concern when Simon listed himself as separated on his tax return.

Search for The Trial of Erin Patterson where you get your podcasts now. To listen ad-free, plus get access to other fascinating true crime series, subscribe to The Crime Desk, the home of arresting podcasts

She also wanted child support and the school fees paid.

The court heard Patterson changed the children’s school without consulting Simon.

In closing her opening address on Wednesday, Dr Rogers told the jury a motive was not necessary for members to convict Patterson and they would not be given one.

‘Motive is not something that has to be proven by the prosecution,’ Dr Rogers said.

‘The prosecution will not be suggesting that there was a particular motive to do what she did.’

Instead, Dr Rogers told the jury that by the end of the trial they would be convinced Patterson lured her victims to lunch with false claims she had cancer before deliberately serving them mini beef Wellingtons laced with death cap mushrooms.

She told the jury it could be convinced Patterson had not eaten any of the poisonous meal, pretended to be sick and never fed her children any of the leftovers containing the death cap mushrooms.

Patterson’s barrister Colin Mandy, SC suggested motive was an important factor in the case.

‘Did she have a motive to kill these four family members?’ he said. ‘That issue of intention is the critical issue in this trial.

‘Did she intend to kill these four people? That’s the issue.

‘We say she didn’t do it deliberately … the defence case is what happened was a tragedy. A terrible accident.’

More to come.