Outlining why Patterson’s crime was so “dreadful”, they talked of the “betrayal of trust” of family members whom she had invited for lunch.
It was, they said, the culmination of a plan she had “orchestrated ” for months, including finding and preparing enough death caps to kill and “concocting a fantastic lie” to explain the lunch.
“The lunch guests had been good to the respondent and her children over many years,” prosecutors said. “Not only did the respondent sit by and watch her victims consume the deadly meal over chit-chat and banter, but the meal ended with a prayer for her, following her lie about having been diagnosed with cancer. “
As the guests lay critically ill, Patterson did not admit to using foraged mushrooms, choosing instead to lie to police and health workers.
“Even when she knew that some of the victims were on life support, she maintained her lies,” the prosecutors said,
At sentencing in September last year, Justice Christopher Beale said he was giving Patterson a glimmer of hope of release, solely because of her “harsh” prison conditions, telling her “there is a substantial chance that, for your protection, you will continue to be held in solitary confinement for years to come”.
But the prosecutors say this was “overstated”, arguing her conditions would improve over time, especially as her notoriety faded.
In court, prosecutor Brendan Kissane listed the activities open to Patterson in prison, including an exercise yard and access to hobbies including crocheting. According to reporters in court, at this point, the triple murderer closed her eyes and shook her head.
While prosecutors say Patterson should never be freed, they argue that if the appeal court disagreed, then it should at least increase the minimum sentence – calling 33 years “manifestly inadequate”.
The minimum term open to the judge for the offences was 30 years. In written arguments, they said an additional three years “utterly fails to reflect the gravity of the offending or vindicate the dignity of each of the four victims”.
Arguing for the punishment to be left as it was Patterson’s lawyers said the judge’s reasoning had been “impeccable” and had “clearly taken into account all relevant considerations” and “made appropriate findings about how serious this matter was”.
Earlier on Thursday prosecutors wrapped up their challenges to Patterson’s appeal to have her convictions thrown out.
Patterson’s lawyers had argued last year’s trial was undermined by a “catastrophic” mix-up that led to the jury staying at the same hotel as prosecutors and a key witness, and that some evidence in the trial was too speculative to have been put before the jury and caused a miscarriage of justice.
