SLEEPWALKING MURDER TRIAL
				Should the court show mercy? Discuss on our message board June 14 Update June 15 Update June 16 Update June 17 Update June 18 Update (Morning) June 18 Update (Afternoon) June 21 Update June 22 Update June 23 Update (Prosecution Closing Arguments) June 23 Update (Defense Closing Arguments) June 24 Update June 25 Update June 25 (The Verdict) June 25 (Post-Verdict Reaction) Jan. 10 (Sentencing)

PHOENIX (Court TV) — Jurors in the sleepwalking murder trial have deliberated nearly eight hours over two days and their questions submitted during deliberations suggest that they are trying to find Scott Falater's motive for killing his wife.

Jurors are deciding whether Falater purposely killed his wife, Yarmila, on January 16, 1997. Falater stabbed her 44 times at their home, dragged her into their pool and then held her head under water.

During the four-week trial and closing arguments, the defense did not deny that Falater killed his wife, but insisted that he did not commit murder because he was sleepwalking at the time, and therefore lacked the intent to kill. Yarmila, the defense said, was killed when she tried to awaken a sleepwalking Falater while he was trying to fix a pool water pump with a hunting knife.

The Falaters, defense attorney Michael Kimerer argued, had a loving marriage for 20 years and there was no evidence of significant marital strife at the time of the killing. Kimerer claimed that the Falater's killing of Yarmila was so inexplicable that the only logical explanation is that Falater, who has a history of somnambulism, was sleepwalking during the incident.

Through expert testimony and the eyewitness account of a neighbor, prosecutors have undermined Falater's sleepwalking theory. Prosecution experts testified Falater's actions — such as changing his bloody clothes, putting them in Tupperware and placing Tupperware in the trunk of his car — suggest that he was not sleepwalking at all during the attack and that a sleepwalker could not have performed such complicated tasks.

But prosecutor Juan Martinez was not able to clearly establish motive. While he suggested the Falaters argued over religion and having more children, the Falaters' friends and relatives testified that the marriage was a happy one.

Jurors' questions during deliberations suggest they are looking for a possible motive and premeditation.

One of the questions submitted to Judge Ron Reinstein read: "Did Yarmila have any close family that she might have confided in? If so, why didn't we hear from her side of the family?"

Jurors also wanted to know whether or not Falater had taken a lie-detector test and the test results.

Falater testified that he kept a hunting knife in his car in case of an emergency which led jurors to ask what kind of emergency he thought would require a hunting knife.

The jurors also asked whether the bloody clothes in the Tupperware container were the same clothes that were in the container prior to the killing, which might indicate planning.

Judge Reinstein told jurors he could not answer their questions and that they had to rely on the evidence submitted at trial. He said that witnesses could not be brought back to the stand and that Falater was not given a lie-detector test because the results would not have been admissible at trial. Falater reportedly offered to take a lie-detector test after his arrest.

In addition to first degree premeditated murder, jurors are also considering second degree murder. If convicted of first degree murder, Falater could face the death penalty. Jury deliberations are expected to resume Friday around 12:30 p.m. EST.

— Bryan Robinson