The Mushroom Tapes: Conversations on a Triple Murder Trial

by Helen Garner, Chloe Hooper, Sarah Krasnostein

In July 2023, in the quiet Gippsland town of Leongatha, Erin Patterson—stay-at-home mother and true-crime devotee—invited her husband’s devoutly Christian family to lunch. Within days, three of her guests were dead and the fourth was in a coma. They had all been poisoned by death cap mushrooms.

Two years later, Patterson stood trial, accused of three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder. The court case gripped the nation and fascinated people all over the world.

Among those drawn into the drama were three renowned Helen Garner, Chloe Hooper and Sarah Krasnostein.

Together, they joined the daily media scrum at the Latrobe Valley Law Courts and spent long days immersed in the case’s sinister and complex love, hate, jealousy, revenge, marriage, money, mycology and murder.

The Mushroom Tapes is a true-crime book like no other—a unique study of Erin Patterson and our collective obsession with her strange and terrible crime.

Helen Garner writes novels, stories, screenplays and works of non-fiction. She is the winner of the Melbourne Prize for Literature, the Windham Campbell Prize for Non-Fiction, the Australia Council Award for Lifetime Achievement in Literature and the Australian Society of Authors Medal. Her books include Monkey Grip, The Children’s Bach, The First Stone, Joe Cinque’s Consolation, The Spare Room, This House of Grief, The Season, How to End a Collected Diaries, which won the prestigious Baillie Gifford Prize for Non-Fiction, and The Mushroom Tapes, with Chloe Hooper and Sarah Krasnostein.

Chloe Hooper is acclaimed for her compelling narratives in both fiction and non-fiction. She is the author of A Child’s Book of True Crime, shortlisted for the Orange Prize for Literature, the multi-award-winning The Tall Death and Life on Palm Island, The A Mind on Fire and Bedtime Story. She has won three Walkley awards.

Sarah Krasnostein is the bestselling author of The Trauma Cleaner and The Believer. Her prizes include the Victorian Prize for Literature and Walkley awards for both long-form feature writing and arts criticism. She holds a doctorate in criminal law and is admitted to practise law in New York and Victoria.

‘Insightful, humane and self-questioning.’ The Times

'Extremely readable...Garner, Hooper and Krasnostein are an acute trio of conversational partners. Their precise, wry observations compel the reader’s attention.’ Guardian

'Sensitive and insightful.' Age

‘Pick up this book and you’ll find it hard to put down.’ Australian

'I was utterly captivated...a dense and deeply engaging weaving of voices, narratives and ideas.’ Conversation

‘Allows us to imagine what the mealtime conversations many of us have been having about this case would be like if three of Australia’s best writers were guests.’ Inside Story

Genres: Nonfiction, True Crime, Audiobook, Crime, Australia, Journalism, Book Club

203 pages, Kindle Edition

First published November 4, 2025

About the author

Helen Garner was born in Geelong in 1942. She has published many works of fiction including Monkey Grip, Cosmo Cosmolino and The Children's Bach. Her fiction has won numerous awards. She is also one of Australia's most respected non-fiction writers, and received a Walkley Award for journalism in 1993.

Her most recent books are The First Stone, True Stories, My Hard Heart, The Feel of Stone and Joe Cinque's Consolation. In 2006 she won the Melbourne Prize for Literature. She lives in Melbourne.

Praise for Helen Garner's work

'Helen Garner is an extraordinarily good writer. There is not a paragraph, let alone a page, where she does not compel your attention.'
Bulletin

'She is outstanding in the accuracy of her observations, the intensity of passion...her radar-sure humour.'
Washington Post

'Garner has always had a mimic's ear for dialogue and an eye for unconscious symbolism, the clothes and gestures with which we give ourselves away.'
Peter Craven, Australian

'Helen Garner writes the best sentences in Australia.'
Ed Campion, Bulletin

Reviews

[Maya Ranganathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Get me in that fucking car to Morwell!

[Luke McCarthy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kind of flimsy, but ultimately worthwhile, even if just for Garner’s terse little pearls of insight.

[William · Rating 2 out of 5]

I would so pissed if my publishers rushed out my half baked ramblings so they could make a quick buck before Christmas.

Tells us nothing, barely redeemed by Helen’s non-sequiturs (“what type of cow is that?” “Is this a banksia?”) and the bit where they suggest everyone who is interested in true crime has domestic problems ranging from the moderate to the extreme.

[Suz · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Mushroom Tapes @text_publishing 🟢🟢🟢
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

Deeply respectful of all three authors, I had the pleasure of listening to them in conversation at a Sydney Writers Festival event moderated seamlessly by Fran Kelly.

This gave me further insight into the case, the book, their dynamics, and the reasons for the book.

Interestingly, it almost did not happen. The friends attended the case a week after commencement as a last minute thing.

To me it read as an intimate conversation between the three, each holding a different professional experience and skill set.

Of course, I love all of Helen’s work, I own Chloe’s, but I am yet to read Sarah’s.

This was extremely interesting and well crafted audio. I loved the live recordings, I loved the banter, but most of all, I observed an astute awareness and a very keen set of eyes brilliantly observing this crazy case.

They are a group of extremely smart women who were able to drill down with their own personal ideas, throwing together their own set of, I suppose you could say, dot points to be put together to make a short book.

I see reviews have not all been positive. I think having the perspective of the live chat, their eloquence, they were so interesting, entertaining and captivating. Lastly I just love Helen’s f bombs, her searing honesty and the way she lead by example, while the others supported and added in equal measure 🫶🏼

I used the event as heft and extra background which informed the book, and I loved every moment. Bravo ladies.

Highly recommended. Proper 5⭐️

[Meg · Rating 2 out of 5]

This sounded problematic - a rushed collection of notes and transcripts of the group chat about a triple murder trial. But with these 3 authors, I didn't care if it was bad!
Turns out... I did care. It was bad. I mean, that cover! You can tell it is a sloppy rush job. There are some beautifully written sentences and insights in here, but they felt contrived. The three authors recount their dreams (😫) and make excuses for why they are morally OK for obsessing over a horrible crime. A let down.

[Marianne · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5★s
“Maybe this is the most horrifying thing of all. That somebody who has the dark feelings we all experience, despite so many resources, still chose that path.”

The Mushroom Tapes is a non-fiction book by award-winning Australian authors, Helen Garner, Chloe Hooper and Sarah Krasnostein, all known for their non-fiction writing, the latter also having a doctorate in criminal law. They decide to attend the triple murder trial of Erin Patterson together, and record their conversations about the experience. This book is the result.

Firstly, they muse on why each of them attends, something that remains in their minds as they observe the glee which some of those attending exhibit. Towards the end, Sarah remarks “But we have to look at our own interest in the case. Is it any different from that gleeful, ogling schadenfreude? Or from those people who are giving her greasies and making sure she sees their dirty looks? I don’t think it’s self-exonerating to say it’s different, and I’m not saying we’re here as lofty, self-appointed guardians of the social fabric, but there’s no glee for me in being here.”

She notes “There’s the idea that we’re trying to repair a rift in shared ethics. And there are so many little things, quiet details, that can reveal the human weight of the story.” To which Helen adds “we’re bearing witness to a rent in the social fabric and how the law is going to deal with it.”

They record their observations and impressions: on witness testimony, the people involved in the trial, the general atmosphere, the intimacy of the small courtroom. They discuss the financial aspect, and the possible motives for the crime. They comment on Simon Patterson’s control, on Erin observing and being observed, on the different perceptions of their marriage gained from family and from Erin’s online friends in their true crime Facebook page.

The book gives some of Erin’s background, and makes mention of the search history indicating research into death cap mushrooms and where they might be located, as well as the purchase of, disposal of, and later, denial of the dehydrator. Also noted are the four incidences of Simon’s admission to hospital after consuming food prepared by Erin, which were not permitted to be mentioned in court.

The women note their confusion, at times, about the person Erin presents, and her reactions to witness testimony. They also observe the reaction of the jury to the (often dense) technical evidence presented, and to witness testimony. Of the obsession of some attending, they report it said “All this dancing around the witch is ghoulish. People have died and you are sick bastards.”

On Justice Beale’s role “In this strange crucible of the courtroom, everything that is wild and overwhelming and uncertain and chaotic is reduced to numbers and units of measurement and comparability.” Sarah puts it succinctly “It must be one of the worst own goals in history, and it exists alongside this meticulous, calculated planning.” When Erin herself is on the stand, they find they are having such complex feelings, they exit the court exhausted.

Most people will have watched nightly news reports of the trial and likely drawn conclusions, but this book gives a very different perspective: that of being in the courtroom and being able to observe all those present: the accused, the defence counsel, the prosecutor, the witnesses, the judge, the jury, the family, the media, and those in the public seats. To feel the mood, to see and hear it all at close range, is a unique experience that these talented authors share with the reader. Informative and fascinating.
This unbiased review is from a copy provided by Text Publishing.

[Anneka Parker · Rating 5 out of 5]

I seriously loved this. It was like hanging out with my three literary big sisters and just soaking up all their wisdom and insights. I can see that it wouldn’t be for everyone but if you, like me, are fascinated by the motive of Erin Patterson and didn’t already deep dive into the trial, this is brilliant. Not sensationalist true crime but something deeper, it really immersed me into that tiny courtroom day by day. Who are these people that we share a community with and yet break our social rules so drastically? How can we understand what it is that pushes someone over that line?

[Reader · Rating 3 out of 5]

From my poison pen & my killer keyboard , here is my book review of The Mushroom Tapes

THE MUSHROOM TAPES — REVIEW

A more accurate title might have been The Mushroom Scrapes—because for all its promise, this book feels more like a graze than a deep cut. And while we’re at it, what is going on with that green cover? More on that later.

Of the three books published so far about the Erin Patterson trial, The Mushroom Tapes was the one I anticipated most. With three highly respected authors—Helen Garner, Chloe Hooper and Sarah Krasnostein—joining forces, the expectations were lofty. The cover promises “Conversations on a triple murder trial.” And yes, the book does contain those conversations.

What it also contains, unexpectedly and disappointingly, is a scatter of cheap shots tossed at members of the public who attended the court proceedings.

From writers of this calibre, it’s startling.
The trio seem to forget that while the book documents their experience of the trial, it also documents them. And the tone that emerges is less “illuminating legal observers” and more “Mean Girls: Literary Edition.” At times, they appear like the too-cool table at school—aloof, amused, and ever so slightly “holier than thou.”

They’re deservedly generous in their praise for Pastor Wilkinson’s grace. Yet they seem to misplace their own by resorting to calling ordinary court attendees “The Real Housewives of Morwell,” as if members of the public simply sitting in the gallery were fair game for ridicule.

A warm, colourful regular was reduced to “Rainbow Man,” and they suggest—casually, carelessly—that he was “probably tripping the whole time.” A curious conclusion, given “Rainbow Man” has over a million followers online and could have been identified simply by asking for his name.

To make matters worse, the coven also comment that “everyone in this court is probably somewhere on the domestic spectrum from moderately to desperately disappointed”; this final statement is one which I can not fathom a group of respected, empowered, intelligent authors making, yet here we are.

Throughout the book, the authors appear vaguely disapproving of those who came to observe the trial. Yet, in a twist of irony, these same observers—or people very much like them—are the ones now buying the $36.99 book (after the abandoned podcast idea) and paying $29–$39.50 to attend the Melbourne Town Hall event, thereby contributing directly to what is, undeniably, the monetisation of tragedy.

The irony is almost fluorescent.

The authors emphasise their commitment to accuracy—particularly during their visit to the house in Gibson Street, Leongatha. But that commitment seems not to have extended to meaningful conversations with the regular court watchers. Instead, the book invents caricatures rather than portraying actual people. Personas are created out of thin air, bearing little resemblance to the individuals who showed up day after day with dignity, curiosity, and respect.

And let’s set one record straight: the book’s suggestion that most public attendees were furiously note-taking is simply wrong. On any given day, perhaps two or three people had notepads. Hardly the frenzied scribble-fest described. The book also implies that regular attendees tried to take courtroom selfies with Erin Patterson.

Not so.

A handful of one-off visitors attempted such nonsense—and were promptly ejected, with any images deleted under the watch of court staff and security. Regular watchers were consistently courteous and dismayed by such behaviour.

Justice must be seen to be done, yes. But accuracy must be seen to be written.

I read the book in two days—part fascination, part disbelief.

Having attended the Wheeler Centre event at Melbourne Town Hall on a cold, wet night (November 10th, 2025), I had already felt flickers of what was to come. I collected my signed copy beforehand, full of anticipation.

The event, like the book, offered hints of brilliance but also flashes of something far less palatable.
Which brings me back to that cover.

That green.

Before reading the book, I wondered why. After finishing it, I still wondered.

Green can signify envy, illness, renewal, nature, greed, even luck. Perhaps it was meant to evoke the natural world—or maybe the colour of the mushrooms themselves. Or perhaps, unintentionally, it reflects something else entirely: a haze of judgement, a tint of superiority, a shade of the discord between what the authors hoped the project would be and what it ultimately became.

Whatever the case, The Mushroom Tapes left me pondering—but not for the reasons its authors might have hoped

[Bronte · Rating 1 out of 5]

Felt very much on the gossipy and grimey side of ‘True Crime’ rather than anything of substance or with journalist integrity. The authors literally talked about not wanting to be seen as feeding the ‘true crime’ monster but maybe if that’s the case they could have actually, I don’t know, taken their shitty speculations and weird phallic dreams out of their work, and put a bit more journalism in there. If it wasn’t so short I would’ve DNFed

[True Crime Bookcase · Rating 2 out of 5]

“Twenty-two months after she served her lunch guests beef Wellington, the distinctive orange plate off which Erin Patterson had eaten came spinning out of the past like a frisbee and landed in front of the jury considering her murder charges.” — Sarah Krasnostein

I went into this book genuinely excited. After spending ten weeks at the Erin Patterson trial (hours of lining up, waiting, talking, processing) I thought this would be the perfect way to revisit the evidence through the eyes of three incredibly talented writers. All three of these authors, I view, have a way with words that I love. All wordsmiths in their own right.

I was even thrilled to see my own name appear early in the book.

But as I read on, that excitement dulled.

While the authors’ insights into the case were sharp, their descriptions of some of the court watchers (my friends included) often felt like backhanded compliments… and at times, not compliments at all. I’ve read countless true crime books and usually take character descriptions with a grain of salt, but this felt different when it was people I’d sat beside every day.

In a small, emotionally heavy courtroom, it’s easy to psychoanalyse everyone around you. But would I put those exact thoughts to paper? As a friend who attended the trial with me said after reading it himself, the authors come off a little holier-than-thou.

While the “intellectuals” in the room received glowing descriptions, the rest of us were swept into one basket: simple country folk. The irony is that most of the court watchers who passed through were actually from the city, popping in for a day or two before disappearing. If the authors had taken a moment to speak to us, they would have known that.

Much of the book is edited transcripts of the authors’ conversations as they carpooled to and from Morwell. At times, it felt like being a fly on the dashboard, listening to their unfiltered thoughts about everyone in the room. Comments like “Real Housewives of Morwell” and “She thinks she’s the boss of the court” felt unnecessarily judgy.

But the line that truly floored me was from Chloe Hooper:

“Everyone in this court is probably somewhere on the domestic spectrum from moderately to desperately disappointed.”

I really wanted to love this book. I even attended an event to hear all three authors speak about it, and I left buzzing with excitement to read what they’d created. But ultimately, I was left disappointed. Not by their writing, but by the way they chose to write about the very people who showed up every day to try to understand the truth.

To borrow Helen Garner’s own words:

“What I don’t want is to write something that’s going to attract her animus.” I assume she meant Erin Patterson… but perhaps all three authors should have considered this sentiment when it came to the court watchers, too.

[Trudie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am not typically drawn to true crime so its hard for me to judge this "conversations on a triple murder". I think if you followed the case closely there might not be much to be gleaned from this podcast in book form. The caliber of the authors is extremely high- Helen Garner is Australian writing royalty. Chloe Hooper and Sarah Krasnostein have true crime pedigree. If anyone was going to write a good book about this case and the hoopla surrounding it, it should be these three and yet this feels like a bit of a rushed fail.
What mostly came across was a sense of perplexity and unknowability of Erin Patterson and her crimes. When the conversation sticks to the facts its reasonable gripping but it spends some time mooning about over the ethics of true crime and then does the very thing that gives true crime podcasts such a bad name; making wildly speculative detours into the state of Gippsland marriages, interviewing a relative of the author that was a student of one of the victims and essentially doing some armchair psychology based on how often Erins eyes flashed in the dock.
There is a palpable sense that this material resisted being melded into an easy narrative and obviously since the podcast idea was ditched everyone just shrugged and decided to bung what they had into a book to be published just 4 months after sentencing.
Nevertheless, an interesting case and this book at least summarises the key beats of the trial fairly well ?
( Bonus factoid - the Beef Wellington recipe came from one of my go to cookbook authors Nagi Maehashi of RecipeTin Eats ! )

[Kate · Rating 4 out of 5]

Apparently it started like this: Sarah and Chloe were to-ing and fro-ing about whether they’d write anything about the ‘mushroom case’.

None of us wants to write about this. And none of us wants not to write about it.

And then they roped in Helen.

One wild domestic detail galvanises us: his dying aunt remembered the guests ate off four grey plates, while the hostess served herself on an orange one.

Can you imagine the team at Text Publishing when they discovered that Helen, Chloe and Sarah said, ‘Yeah, we’ll do something but only if we can do it together'? Publishing pay-dirt.

And so we have The Mushroom Tapes by Helen Garner, Chloe Hooper and Sarah Krasnostein.

Even if you have no interest in this case, and even if you have no interest in true crime, avid readers will be drawn to this book for the novelty format alone. And if you like the work of any or all of the authors, it’s a must-read. Their individual styles come through so distinctly - Helen with her inquisitive, thinking-out-loud observations; Chloe’s gentler narrative approach; and Sarah’s journalistic and forensic attention to detail.

Sarah: Helen and I texted 'a nice bowl of porridge' to each other at the same time, and I knew she had teared up too. It's those tiny, quotidian details that contain the world - we can all relate to them.

The book is essentially a record of their conversations - recorded as they drove to Morwell, where the trial was held; or in their motel rooms at the end of the day; or phone conversations from Melbourne to Morwell (when they did not get a balloted seat in the small Morwell courtroom, they accessed a live telecast of proceedings at the Supreme Court in Melbourne). There’s some scene setting and other contextual detail, and although it's chronological, the book is arranged around themes - the court, the death cap, the victims, and so on. Overall, it reads like a play, with the three authors slowing unfolding the drama.

Chloe: Even the way that she behaved after the murderous lunch is unhinged.
Sarah: And again, there's this keeling between deep premeditation and...
Chloe: ...no plan at all.
Sarah: Why didn't she smash that dehydrator into a million pieces and bury each shard in the bush? ... It must be one of the worst own goals in history, and it exists alongside this meticulous, calculated planning. Bigness and smallness.

Ultimately their observations are speculation, but the observations are so interesting and articulate. They explore the parallels with folklore; the 'data' on female poisoners (they usually have 'strong wish-fulfillment fantasies'); Erin's apparent feelings of 'not belonging'; the 'domestic' nature of this crime (and hence the public fascination for the case); the metaphor of fungal spores and 'murderous intent' (with the same applied to phone networks and fungi); and the significance of religion in the story.

Helen: The thing about female poisoners is it's the flip side of mothering. It's the most appalling betrayal of what women are supposed to be like. We're supposed to nourish and put in front of people food that brings life to them. This story is an inversion.

I read this book in two sittings. There are lots of little facts that I hadn't known (it probably doesn't hold anything new for the true-crimers who followed the case closely), but read it for the banter between these three marvelous authors.

4/5

Chloe:...I admit, though, that every time somebody mentions beef Wellington, I hear a little bell of absurdity ring. It's such a flamboyantly retro dish. ... When I admitted this bell-ring to Sarah, she put me right beautifully. The reason this story is so compelling is that it has everything in it that's human, including absurdity. 

[Audrey · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you followed the trial closely, you won’t find much in The Mushroom Tapes that you didn’t already know. The book is essentially a heavily edited transcript of a podcast that never actually materialised, and it reads exactly like that—three authors circling familiar territory without adding much in the way of new insight.

I went in hoping for depth, analysis, or at least the sharp observational detail that Helen Garner, especially, is known for. Instead, a lot of it drifted into what felt like unfocused musing and, frankly, waffle. It’s not that the subject matter isn’t compelling—it absolutely is—but the treatment here feels rushed, as though the project was hurried to print to catch the pre-Christmas crowd.

Garner has written some of my favourite true-crime books, which makes this one all the more disappointing. If you’re new to the case, the book might serve as a tidy recap. But if you’ve been following along from the start, you’ll likely walk away feeling that this was a missed opportunity.

[Erin Cook]

The sum is not worth its parts here, I think.

What I do find interesting in a way is that Erin Patterson never struck me as a particularly fascinating figure in any direction, beyond being a murderer. Because of the weird structure of this you can see the trio try out things that could maybe make her compelling — her relationship to her mother, Munchausen, something-something the Baptists — and none of them work. There is nothing interesting here. The case itself is meaningless beyond the community it impacted. It's a post-Covid Victorian fever dream and despite efforts to import it with meaning for the country, or women, or whatever else, it just doesn't work. Just seems beneath the three writers, to me.

[Tracey Allen at Carpe Librum · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Mushroom Tapes - Conversations on a Triple Murder Trial by Helen Garner, Chloe Hooper and Sarah Krasnostein is about the trial of Erin Patterson, accused of three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder. Charged with serving her family members a lethal lunch of beef Wellington in Leongatha in July 2023, the trial took place in Morwell in April - July 2025 where she was eventually found guilty.

I followed the news coverage of Erin Patterson’s trial quite closely and listened to every episode of the Mushroom Case Daily podcast on the ABC. For these reasons and more, I was deeply interested in the collaboration between these three Australian writers having read books by all of them. Familiar with Helen Garner's penetrating coverage of murder trials I was also fascinated to know the types of conversations these women had on a topic I never seem to tire of.

The Mushroom Tapes is a slim offering at only 240 pages so immediately you know you're not going to get a comprehensive coverage of the trial. What surprised me on the very first page though was that the authors weren't in attendance at the beginning of the trial. They'd been asked if they were going to cover the trial and they each said no. All three authors equally hadn't wanted to write about the case and hadn't not wanted to write about it.

However after they heard the evidence from Simon Patterson's Aunt Heather Wilkinson that the guests ate from grey plates and the host ate from an orange one, they changed their minds and were galvanised into action. Helen Garner said that she didn't want to follow another big trial by herself and was glad to be asked to work with Chloe; accomplished herself with two trials and two books to her name. On day five they decided to cover the trial together and piled into the car to Morwell.

In the early stages, the women weren't sure whether they were collaborating to write a book or produce a podcast so they recorded their conversations with a view to deciding later and it shows.

Sharing the duties of sitting in the courtroom and listening to the live testimony in Melbourne via media audio-link, the reader is given snippets of conversations taking place in the car to and from court or over the phone. Often reading like a script, the effect made me feel as though I was in the car with them but without hearing their full experience.

These conversations ranged from how they felt standing outside Erin Patterson's house to the Defence Lawyer's potential advice to the defendant regarding a guilty plea; noting that if her lawyers know Patterson is guilty they can't make arguments inconsistent with that as they have a duty to the court.

"Most charges end up resolving in a guilty plea. But the personality that commits a crime like this is the same personality that believes they can get away with it." Sarah, Page 77

Every intellectual discussion the authors had about the case was of interest, including the conversation about whether the defendant might have a personality disorder and whether she was envious of the love shown to her children by their father and grandparents.

Shockingly, Helen has learned from attending family murder trials that just because you love someone doesn't mean you don't ever want to kill them; a statement which caused me to stop and ponder. It seemed to me the authors believed Patterson was guilty as they considered the difference between remorse and regret:

"Helen: Raimond Gaita says that remorse is a pained, bewildered realisation of what it means to have wronged someone. Sarah: Regret is self-interested. Remorse is a deeper thing." Page 134

Analysing Patterson's conduct in the witness box, they note that she's been unable to maintain a job, study or relationship for any sustained period of time despite having every resource, intellectual and financial at her disposal. They comment on her ability to unsettle them and notice that there's 'some force sheeting off her.' While they do discuss her persona and her false self, I was surprised they never talked about the family estrangements with her sister and her parents, and if they did, I'd love for it to have been included in the book.

I wasn't surprised to read that Patterson disagreed with every single witness but fascinated to hear that she talked back to the Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC when being questioned on the witness stand with semantic critiques like these:

"Sorry, I was confused by the double negatives," and "You're going to have to rephrase that, so I know what you're talking about." Pages 200-201

I can't even imagine delivering that amount of snark or attitude in a Police interview room, let alone if I was in the witness box on trial for murder.

The authors often reflect on the huge scale of the media following this trial, their feelings on their own involvement and the incredible global interest in this case:

"Two hundred and fifty-two journalists and outlets are on the court media's daily email list, including representatives from fifteen international media outlets. There are seven podcasters, seven documentary crews, one television drama series and nine authors, including us." Page 140

Growing up in Gippsland, it's hard to fathom the sheer level of interest this case has generated and the authors often try to determine what it is about the murders and murderer that has captured this level of attention.

When acknowledging the closing arguments for the Defence by Colin Mandy SC, I was reminded of his address to the jury:

"If you think that it's possible that Erin deliberately poisoned the meal, you must find her not guilty... If you think that maybe Erin deliberately poisoned the meal you must find her not guilty. If you think that she probably deliberately poisoned the meal, you must find her not guilty." Page 209

Recalling this coverage brings a chill down my spine as I feared the jury would find Patterson not guilty after hearing it. When discussing her guilt or innocence, Helen acknowledges this as one of the most brilliant performances she's ever seen in her life while Sarah agrees Patterson is a liar but that liars can still be not guilty of murder.

Discussing what they would do in the event of a hung jury, Helen was clear that she wouldn't want to do anything with the tapes and would walk away from the project. Sarah mentioned she would be incapable of not attending a potential retrial while Helen would feel glad to escape one and doesn't want to write something that's going to attract the defendant's animus or attention.

Late in the book during the jury deliberations, they acknowledge that the podcast they'd started making has fallen over and that sometimes it feels as though the book they're still loosely imagining might do the same. This indicates to me that there was no clear plan at the outset and that one failed to emerge during the trial. And what's with the book cover? I was fortunate to purchase a copy signed by each of the authors but I thought it was the advanced reader's copy when I first saw it in the publisher's catalogue.

But most disappointing of all was the fact that there was no discussion or reflection on the verdict or the sentencing at all! The reader is privy to the verdict and the sentencing by Justice Beale, but then that's it. Without their thoughts on the verdict and the all important sentencing, The Mushroom Tapes feels unfinished. And perhaps it is.

True crime enthusiasts looking for a thorough or comprehensive summary of the trial will need to look elsewhere, perhaps to one of the seven podcasters, seven documentary crews or nine authors also covering the case. I had enough interest in this collaboration and Helen Garner's perspectives to keep reading but I was ultimately disappointed and wanted so much more from The Mushroom Tapes. I'd even be keen to listen to the raw footage!

[Jess Lomas]

This wasn’t a book I intended to read as I don't enjoy true crime, but the combination of Garner, Hooper and Krasnostein and the book’s unique format hooked me. More than a retelling of the Mushroom Murders trial, it’s an exploration of how three writers' minds think: questioning everything, rationalising, meditating on female criminality and the craft of writing itself. Through their transcribed conversations, the book also captures the unexpected camaraderie that develops among the media, legal teams and public following the months-long case. Highly recommended.

[Claire · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was probably more interesting because I knew nothing about the trial and because I had already decided to read Helen Garner's collected diaries.

So this was a spontaneous purchase and I was curious to see how the 3 authors pull off the idea of road trip conversations, a collaborative approach.

It's a terrible tragic event when 3 relatives die so suddenly after a Sunday lunch due to poisoning and even worse to imagine it may have been deliberate.

Though they attempt to discover a motive, they seem to have been kind, gentle people, so the focus becomes more of an analysis of the personality of Erin Patterson, the accused, the disintegration of her marriage, her resentments, her fascination with true crime and the online community of friends she was part of in absence of the same in real life.

It seems also strange the attention the trial is given in this age of podcasts and content creation, so many people pursuing a trial for their own opportunity and attention, a conversational book seems almost an oxymoron.

Intriguing, and with its own glimmer of hope as the sole survivor, shares the final thought-provoking words and exhibits values lacking elsewhere.

[Ron Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had not followed this case all that closely over the years from when Erin Patterson was charged till when she was found guilty. Some months ago, I had finished “Meadows Law: The true story of Kathleen Folbigg and the science that set her free.” By Quentin McDermott. I did have concerns that this was another case, like Lindy Chamberlain, of trial by media. Women are often treated very differently to men in these types of legal cases.

Helen Garner and Chloe Hooper are two of my favourite authors. Many years ago, at a Newcastle Writers Festival I made the comment to Hooper that her writing reminded me of Garner’s work. Later she came over and we chatted. She is a delightful person and a talented writer. A week or so ago I listened to Garner being interviewed, so when the book became available, I jumped at the chance to listen to it. I don’t regret this decision. The book follows an interesting format, the three authors discuss the trial, the culprit, the victims, the court staff, the media and community members who visited the court. The audiobook is probably the best format to engage with this story.

My initial question about this crime was about motive. The authors never fully answered the question why, but they did contribute many insights into Erin Patterson. The few visual images we have of her appear to not really capture the physical and intellectual capacity of the woman. Her intellect is mentioned on several occasions. She was undoubtedly a silently bitter women, a bitterness that drove her to murder three people who had contributed nothing to create this bitterness.

It amazed me how little thought she must have put into carrying out this evil act. She was a member of a true crime Facebook group. She certainly didn't learn much. She left a Hansel and Gretel trail of clues to her crime.

Reading about the three victims, in-laws Don and Gail Patterson and Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson, was disturbing. Good Christian souls who made no demands on the world and gave back so much.

Garner writes a descriptive piece at the end about Patterson’s life in gaol, rather a dismal future for the woman.

Finally, in many respects the discussion format is very suitable for this type of text.

[Tilda · Rating 2 out of 5]

Um, this book really annoyed me. I don't even know where to start in reviewing it because it was very readable and page turney (so there is that) and like...probably 2-3 moments where a turn of phrase was kinda interesting and notable (always Garner). BUT, otherwise it was somehow simultaneously shallow but also trying to achieve depth unsuccessfully. The constant reaching for metaphors or cultural references was exhausting and honestly just came across as pompous. I rolled my eyes a lot. I also found them kinda patronising towards the other court watchers and a bit on their high horses in their self-justifications despite some tepid hang wringing about whether they are "just as bad" as the other voyeurs. Also I just found they really brought nothing new into the mix. It would have been interesting if they did some actual journalism, explored some of the characters attending court, did some interviews - anything. The best we got was an interview with Chloe Hooper's nephew by marriage who was a student of Simon Patterson?!? This book doesn't need to exist.

[Em Cow · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked this for the same reasons other people didn't like this.
The format is odd and refreshing, reading predominantly as a transcript of conversation between the three authors. Some argue this feels underdeveloped and superficial. I found many of these conversations to offer alternative perspectives to my own and bring in a lens of literature, of archetype and myth to Erin Patterson and her crimes that I hadn't considered. It also added an element of the everyday and mundane to the process of court trial, which I again really enjoyed.
I have listened extensively to podcasts and I found that the facts these women highlighted were different, offering new light on the crime.
Helen Garner's brain just works in amazing ways and some of her remarks were brilliant.

[Alessandra · Rating 1 out of 5]

I’m not a true crime buff. I’m not big on discussions about penis dreams during a murder trial. There were a lot of discussions about poo. And a lot of borderline unhinged symbolic analysis of stupid/cruel/self-righteous/deadly human decisions.

I admit, I am not the target audience for this, but I also genuinely think this woefully constructed.

[Piper · Rating 4 out of 5]

This reads almost exactly like buzzfeed unsolved in book format, if ever so slightly more academic and self aware. So it ticked a lot of boxes for me and my interests.

[Janelle · Rating 2 out of 5]

Oh well, I knew I shouldn’t have bothered with this, the mushroom murder was so hyped up and the coverage over the top. But I thought ‘it’s Helen Garner, and Chloe Hooper who wrote Tall Man: The Death of Doomadgee should be good.’
Instead it was a major disappointment for me, just following three friends either travelling to the trial of Erin Patterson or watching it from a distance when they didn’t get allocated seats and transcribed recordings of their conversations probably no more insightful really than any of the many lounge room discussions after watching the news reports of the trial (and I know ours were darker and funnier!). It didn’t get me thinking or make me emotional or anything really, it’s too light for that.
And would it have hurt them to get a designer for the cover? It’s awful.

[hollie · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 ⭐️

Sadly, neither a comprehensive expository of the trial or a unique exploration into a woman's animus.

I wanted more depth and more Morwell (The locals! The lady who got a mushroom tattoo! A whole book could be written, the characters already exist).

[Carolyn · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting take on the true crime reporting/ podcast genre. I think the audiobook is the appropriate way to consume this conversational style book, listening to the three authors chat together. I followed Erin Patterson’s trial quite closely and listened to the ABC podcast Mushroom Case Daily so I was intrigued to hear the take these three erudite and perceptive women had on the case. I enjoyed their opinions not only about Patterson’s motivations but also why so many of us were engrossed in the whole sorry saga, relatable domestic ordinariness and family resentments with some major mental issues that led to three murders. I liked their observations of small details that ultimately gave me a better understanding of the trial and the character of Erin Patterson.

[Alice Manderson · Rating 2 out of 5]

Felt like a bunch of gossiping aunts. The occasional nuggets of wisdom weren’t really worth the paddle.

[Heather · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars rounded down. This is a hard one to rate - on the one hand, I love these women, each an intelligent heavy hitter in the true crime world, and really enjoyed listening to their discussions on the Erin Patterson case (definitely recommend the audio version!). On the other hand, this book doesn't come close to living up to its potential. With authors like these, writing about the trial of such an horrific case, I was expecting a nuanced, fascinating analysis of class, religion, mental health, relationships, media, and the Australian legal system. Garner wrote This House of Grief, after all, which is truly excellent! Instead, this short book provides quite a surface view of the case and the people involved, interspersed with interesting, though brief, discussions on the nature the case and Patterson.
Apparently the authors had originally conceptualised this as content for a podcast, which does explain the format. However, I wish they'd spent a bit more time on the manuscript once they decided to make this a book, to get it to what it deserves to be. Instead, it feels like a rush job aimed at taking advantage of the current public interest in the case following the recent verdict (whether or not this was the intention). Such a wasted opportunity!

All that said, it is a completely bonkers case and these women ARE amazing, so I'd still recommend it to those who enjoy true crime. Just lower your expectations!


A random aside - I had to change my profile picture due to the sheer number of creepy men adding me to chat! It's a book site, people, jeez.

[Ellen · Rating 5 out of 5]

I gasped when I saw this lined up at the library. Garner, Hooper and Krasnostein. It's the authorial equivalent of a perfect row at bingo. Three intelligent, articulate women, chatting with gentle charm about the criminal case du jour, sifting through its facts and fissures. This was never going to be anything but more-ish for me.

[Gia (지아) · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the ONE and ONLY time I’ll ever say this………. they should start a podcast

[Mary · Rating 5 out of 5]

Anything Helen writes, I read…..