Court has finished for the day.

Follow along tomorrow for more updates.

Justice Beale has referred the jury to evidence regarding Patterson’s phone and lies in her police interview.

He recalled evidence from the child protection worker, who said Patterson had told her in the days after the lunch that she feared for her privacy and was planning on changing her phone number.

Justice Beale noted evidence in relation to the factory resets on phone B, which included two that occurred while her phone was in police custody.

The court also previously heard that Patterson told detectives her number ended in 835, but further checks revealed she had another number and the 835 card had only recently been activated.

Justice Beale then referred to photos from the police search which showed items sitting on a shelf in Patterson’s home, which the defence suggested were phones that police failed to seize.

Detective Leading Senior Constable Stephen Eppingstall told the court he did not believe the items were phones because, if they were, they would have been seized by police.

Justice Beale said Patterson gave evidence that she was changing her phone because she didn’t want Simon to be able to contact her and that she carried out three of the four factory resets.

The court previously heard Patterson had another phone, phone A, which was connected on 12 February 2023, but never recovered by police.

Police told the court Patterson also mentioned a Nokia phone in her interview with detectives, but the device was not seized.

The prosecution argued Patterson concealed phone A and factory reset phone B because she did not want detectives viewing the contents of her devices.

Justice Beale noted the defence argued police failed to seize her devices and Patterson carried out the factory resets because she “panicked”.

Justice Beale has taken the jury to the prosecution’s allegation Patterson engaged in incriminating conduct by disposing of the food dehydrator.

Justice Beale took the jury back to evidence provided by Koonwarra Transfer Station manager Darren Canty, who described how evidence was collected relating to Patterson visiting the tip.

The court was reminded toxicologist Dimitri Gerostamoulos and plant virologist Dr David Lovelock gave evidence that traces of death cap mushrooms were found in the food dehydrator.

Justice Beale said Patterson gave testimony that Simon said to her, in relation to the dehydrator, “is that what you used to poison my parents”.

Patterson said it was then she started to suspect that mushrooms she foraged were in the meal and she dumped it in a “panic” as she was “scared” she would be blamed for making her guests ill and authorities would remove her children.

Justice Beale noted the prosecution argued “panic” did not explain Patterson’s efforts to get rid of the dehydrator and her actions would not have been discovered if detectives had not found the tip transaction in her bank records.

He said the defence argued if Patterson was trying to get rid of her dehydrator to conceal a crime that she would have done it sooner.

Justice Beale has taken the jury through the prosecution’s allegation that Patterson engaged in incriminating conduct by showing reluctance to receive medical treatment.

Justice Beale referred to testimony from nurse Cindy Munro who said Patterson was reluctant to receive treatment.

Munro said Patterson said she “didn’t want any of this” (in relation to the treatments being provided) and did not want to be given IV fluid.

Munro said Patterson’s reluctance led her to go speak to a colleague, who went and spoke to Patterson to explain the importance of the medication.

During her testimony, Patterson said she did not say any of those things to Munro and that she accepted she needed treatment, which is why she had gone to the hospital.

Justice Beale said senior prosecutor Dr Nanette Rogers, in her closing address, said it was inexplicable that Patterson would not want treatment if she was actually sick.

Justice Beale noted defence barrister Colin Mandy, in his closing address, called the prosecution’s argument “contradictory” because if Patterson was trying to pretend to be sick, she would have requested the doctors give her treatment.

Justice Beale has taken the jury to the prosecution’s allegation that Patterson was reluctant to have her children treated.

He referred to testimony provided by medical staff, who said the mother-of-two showed reluctance to have her children brought to hospital for assessment.

Justice Beale noted Patterson gave testimony that she had lost faith in the medical system due to previous negative experiences.

Patterson said she was stressed, confused, and trying to wrap her head around the situation when medical staff were advising her to have her children assessed.

She said she did not think there was a real risk her children could die, as expressed to her by medical staff, and that although she was reluctant at first, she accepted her children should be taken to hospital.

Justice Beale also noted arguments by the defence that nurse Kylie Ashton was mistaken about when she learnt about the children consuming the leftovers.

Ashton said Patterson told her that detail during her first visit to the hospital, but the defence argue she did not tell them until the second visit.

Justice Beale has instructed the jury to disregard a key argument made by the prosecution team in their closing address.

The statement came as he was taking the jury through the prosecution’s arguments about Patterson’s alleged incriminating conduct in relation to the lunch leftovers.

Their arguments include the proposition that the only source of information that the children actually ate the leftovers was Patterson herself.

The prosecution also argued the children would have experienced symptoms if they ate the leftovers and that Patterson told authorities her kids consumed the food because it would make it seem the poisonings were accidental.

Justice Beale noted the defence argued there was no evidentiary basis to the claim the children would have become sick from the leftovers.

Justice Beale said Rogers “overstated” the evidence that the amatoxins penetrated the meat and the jury should disregard that statement.

Justice Beale said no expert was asked whether if the mushroom paste and pastry had been scraped off the meat, if the children would have experienced symptoms.

“You have no expert evidence to whether that would be the case,” Justice Beale said.

“So I direct you to disregard that argument.

“You would be speculating if you go down that path.”

Justice Beale has now taken the jury through the prosecution’s allegation that Patterson lied about feeding leftovers from the lunch to her two children the next day.

Justice Beale recapped testimony from Simon Patterson, in which he described how Patterson called him to ask if he could bring the children to the hospital because they had eaten the lunch leftovers.

Simon previously told the court he asked the children during the car ride what they had eaten, and his daughter said meat, beans and potatoes.

Justice Beale recalled the children’s testimony to detectives in which they described the leftovers and how much they ate.

He also noted the evidence provided by various medical professionals who spoke to Patterson about her children eating the leftovers.

Justice Beale then recapped Patterson’s evidence on the topic.

Patterson told the court she gave the kids the leftovers because she didn’t feel like cooking anything.

She also said all of the leftovers recovered from her bins were all of the leftovers from the lunch and that her children were “mistaken” when they told detectives she also ate some of the leftovers with them.

Justice Beale has taken the jury back to witness evidence pertaining to Patterson’s alleged lying about the source of the mushrooms used in the beef wellington.

He recapped testimony from various medical professionals who told the court Patterson said she purchased some of the mushrooms used in the dish from an Asian grocer in Melbourne.

He said Matthew Patterson gave evidence that he rang Patterson to ask her where she bought the mushrooms, and she told him Woolworths and an Asian shop in the Oakleigh area.

Justice Beale also referred to testimony from public health officer Sally Ann Atkinson and a child protecction worker.

In Atkinson’s evidence, she said Patterson told her she was going to use the dried mushrooms in an earlier dish, but decided not to because they “smelt funny”.

Atkinson said she had made several efforts to follow up with Patterson but had difficulty contacting her and, when they spoke, she was “never precise” about the location of the Asian grocer.

Atkinson also said Patterson didn’t mention Glen Waverley as a possible location for the store until their third conversation.

The child protection worker told the court Atkinson asked her to help facilitate a call to Patterson, which she did when she went to the mother-of-two’s home in early August.

The child protection worker said she heard Patterson telling Atkinson about the dried mushrooms, including a description of the label, where she believed she bought them, and her decision to not use them in an earlier meal.

The child protection worker said she asked Patterson if she foraged the mushrooms used in the meal and she didn’t respond, instead gazing out the window and looking at her phone.

Justice Beale also ran the jury through evidence from plant virologist Dr David Lovelock, who found DNA for white button mushrooms in the lunch leftovers the presence of death cap mushrooms in the food dehydrator.

Justice Beale noted Dr Lovelock said the tests found the presence of a second mushroom species in the leftovers, but further testing was required to identify it, which was turned down by police.

The court heard the unidentified species was not death cap mushrooms, as they would have been identified as such during the initial testing.

Justice Beale then went through Patterson’s testimony, including her reason for dumping the dehydrator and her memory of conversations with doctors, authorities, and relatives about the source of the mushrooms.

Other details from her evidence that were noted included her testimony that she ate a 1kg of mushrooms in the days leading up to the lunch (which is why a Woolworth receipt shows she bought 750g more a few days later), and that she only started to suspect foraged mushrooms were in the meal on the night of 1 August 2023.

Justice Beale is taking the jury through the prosecution’s next alleged instance of incriminating conduct by Patterson.

Yesterday, Justice Beale said the prosection’s allegations of incriminating conduct include:

• Patterson (allegedly) lying about being unwell and faking being poisoned
• Patterson allegedly lying that she used dried Asian mushrooms in the beef wellington
• Patterson refusing treatment on her first presentation at Leongatha Hospital and leaving against medical advice
• That Patterson was reluctant to receive treatment for herself on her second visit to Leongatha Hospital
• That Patterson was reluctant to receive treatment for her children on 31 July 2023
• That Patterson allegedly lied that she fed her children the leftover beef wellington with the mushroom and pastry scrapped off
• That Patterson reset phone B multiple times commencing on 2 August 2023
• That Patterson, on 2 August 2023, disposed of the dehydrator at the tip
• That Patterson, on 5 August 2023, during the search of her home, gave police phone B instead of phone A, her usual phone
• That Patterson, on 5 August 2023, during the record of interview, lied that her normal number ended in 835, rather than providing police with her usual number ending in 783
• That Patterson lied that she had not dehydrated mushrooms
• That Patterson lied to police that she had never foraged
• That Patterson lied to police about the dehydrator, saying she may have had a dehydrator years ago.

Justice Christopher Beale has resumed his charge to the jury.

As jurors entered the court, Justice Beale advised them his directions will continue into next week.

“You’ll be able to go home for the weekend and then I’ll continue completing my charge (on Monday),” he said.

After Justice Beale finishes delivering his directions on Monday, the jury will be sent out to deliberate.

They will be sequestered each night for the duration of their deliberations.

That means they will be staying in accommodation, rather than going home, until a verdict is reached.