Rogers replied: “It’s a very straightforward question.”

The exchange came after the prosecutor took Patterson to records found on a computer in her home that show the citizen science website iNaturalist was searched using the Bing search engine on May 28, 2022.

Rogers said the records indicate the user navigated to a world map for death cap mushroom sightings, visited a map of sightings in the greater Melbourne area before selecting a single observation made in Bricker Reserve Moorabbin on May 18 the same year.

“It’s possible it was me, the only thing that gives me pause is I didn’t use Internet Explorer or Bing but I accept that maybe I did this time, I’m not sure,” she said.

“I remember wanting to find out if death cap mushrooms grow in South Gippsland and finding out they did not, so it might have been this search.”

Patterson is expected to return to the witness box when the trial resumes on Tuesday.

She is facing trial after pleading not guilty to the murder of her husband Simon Patterson’s parents and aunt, and the attempted murder of his uncle.

Don and Gail Patterson, and Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson, died in hospital in the week after eating a beef wellington lunch at Patterson’s home on July 29, 2023.

Heather’s husband Ian Wilkinson survived after spending about a month and a half in hospital.

Prosecutors allege the accused woman deliberately spiked the lunch with death cap mushrooms.

Her defence accepts there were death cap mushrooms in the meal but argues she did not intentionally poison anyone and the case is a “tragic accident”.

Crown suggests Patterson was ‘two-faced’

In a terse exchange, Rogers suggested Patterson was angry her in-laws, Don and Gail, had taken their son’s side during a dispute between the pair in late 2022.

“That’s not true,” the accused responded.

Rogers then suggested Patterson had “two faces”, with a public face presenting a good relationship with Don and Gail.

“Are you asking me to agree if I have two faces?” she shot back.

“I had a good relationship with Don and Gail.”

Rogers suggested Patterson’s “private face” was revealed in Facebook Messenger messages to her online group of friends.

“Incorrect,” Patterson replied.

She also denied the Facebook messages were a true expression of her views towards her husband Simon Patterson about her in-laws.

“You did not regard him as being a decent human being at his core?” Rogers asked.

Patterson replied: “Actually, I still believe that.”

Cook denies poison meal claim

Under questioning from Rogers, Patterson agreed that she was “keen” for her husband to attend the meal.

Rogers took Patterson to a message exchange the night before the lunch, after Simon declined an invitation saying he felt “too uncomfortable” to attend.

“That’s really disappointing. I’ve spent many hours this week preparing lunch for tomorrow… I wanted it to be a special meal as I may not be able to host a lunch like this again for some time,” Patterson replied.

Patterson denied a suggestion that she told the lunch guests the reason for the invitation was to discuss a serious medical issue, but did say she raised the topic.

“It was not why I was inviting him, it was not why I was inviting anybody,” she said.

Rogers suggested the reason Patterson wanted him to come to the lunch was to feed him part of the poisoned meal.

“That’s not true,” she said.

Patterson was next taken to evidence she gave earlier this week about when she first began to suspect her foraged mushrooms had been used in the meal.

She told the jury after a conversation with Simon at Monash Hospital on August 1, she started to question if her dehydrated wild mushrooms had been stored with store-bought mushrooms.

Patterson confirmed that she knew her in-laws were in hospital from July 30.

“Surely if you loved them you would have notified health authorities about the possibility of the foraged mushrooms in the container?” Rogers said.

“Well I didn’t,” Patterson replied. “I had been told people were getting treatment for possible death cap mushroom poisoning so that was already happening.”

Asked by Rogers if it was true she did not tell a single person, Patterson confirmed, “that’s correct I did not tell anybody”.

“Instead on Wednesday the 2nd of August you got up, you drove your children to school… and then you got rid of the dehydrator,” Rogers said.

Patterson replied: “Correct.”

Judge’s update on trial

The Supreme Court judge overseeing the trial has given jurors an update on what to expect in the coming weeks.

Addressing the 14-person panel about noon on Thursday, Justice Beale told jurors the trial length had “probably been on your minds”.

Beale said at the start of Patterson’s trial six weeks ago he’d given jurors an estimate of six weeks and, while he would not provide an updated time frame, he would summarise “how things will play out from here on”.

“It’s likely that Ms Patterson will be in the witness box for the rest of the week and probably into early next week,” he said.

“After she has completed giving evidence, it will be necessary, or the law requires it for me to have some legal discussions with the parties.

“And those discussions could take a couple of days.”

Beale said this could see out the hearings next week, which will be a day short because of the King’s Birthday public holiday in Victoria.

He said the discussion would include whether there is to be any more evidence in the case and what directions of the law would be necessary for him to give at the end of the trial.

After all evidence had been adduced, the judge said the prosecution and defence would deliver their closing addresses, which could take a couple of days.

“And then my final directions to you, which involves three parts: giving you directions about legal principles that apply in this case, which takes quite a bit of time; identifying for you the key issues in the case and summarising for you the evidence and arguments in relation to those issues; that also takes a fair time,” Justice Beale said.

“So I haven’t put a figure on it, but I have tried to put you in the picture as to how this is going to play out and it may be necessary for you to make some arrangements.”

Following this, Justice Beale said the jurors would be given “all the time you need” to decide the facts of the case.

The trial continues.