Narrator (58:17)
Guy Leshner, a sleep disorder specialist, explains the phenomenon of local sleep to help understand why such acts occur. He notes, most of us think being awake means our brains are fully awake, but actually little areas of our brains are constantly dipping in and out of sleep. Feeling awake and looking awake doesn't always mean that our brains are active. There is very clear evidence that when people are sleepwalking, it's the parts of the brain responsible for emotion, movement and vision that show this waking pattern, whereas the parts of the brain responsible for rational thinking and memory demonstrate sleeping behaviour. If you think about which parts of those brains are disconnected, it's the bits that are responsible for being a sensible human being. This suggests that during sleepwalking, the brain is in a state where rational thought and memory are inactive, while the more instinctual and reactive parts remain active. As a result, a person may perform actions without conscious awareness or control, sometimes leading to unintended consequences. Before presenting their unconventional theory to Scott, his mother Lois and sister Laura first shared it with his attorney. Worried it might be too outlandish to be taken seriously in court, however, Scott's attorney embraced the idea and decided to abandon the insanity defence in favour of pursuing the sleepwalking theory at trial. This shift in strategy quickly drew public attention. What had initially been considered a relatively unremarkable case now garnered widespread media focus as the unusual and controversial defence strategy took centre stage. Reactions were mixed. Some dismissed the idea of committing a crime while asleep as laughable, while others compared it to a bizarre movie plot. Scott Fileta was initially sceptical of the sleepwalking theory himself. He had no recollection of the incidents from his past, including the one in which he allegedly threw his sister Laura across the kitchen. As a logical and methodical person, Scott felt the sleepwalking defence lacked any basis in reality, telling ABC's 20 20, I just felt it was a bunch of bullshit. For him to consider it even remotely possible, he needed scientific proof. So in preparation for his trial, Scott agreed to undergo a sleep study. For four nights, he was connected to electrodes and monitors that measured the depth and quality of his sleep. While the results came back as inconclusive, they did indicate that Scott fit the profile of a sleepwalker. Scott's attorney also sought the expertise of several prominent sleep disorder specialists, including leading figures in the study of sleepwalking violence. One of the key experts was neurophysiologist Roger Broughton, who had previously testified in the trial of Kenneth Parks over a decade earlier. In Broughton's professional opinion, Scott, like Kenneth, had been in a sleepwalking state when he committed murder. As such, he was not legally responsible for his actions. This conclusion was supported by other experts the defence consulted. Following this, Scott began to believe that sleep deprivation and work related stress had indeed triggered a sleepwalking episode which ultimately led to him killing his wife. The prosecution, on the other hand, remained adamant that Scott had consciously and intentionally killed Yarmila. His trial began in May 1999, nearly two and a half years after Yarmila's murder. While the defence presented all of their expert findings to support the sleepwalking theory, the prosecution contended that the crime scene evidence clearly demonstrated that Yamala's death was far from accidental. According to the prosecution, the trajectory of Yarmila's wounds suggested she had been attacked from behind by someone who reached around to stab her in the chest. This contradicted the defence's suggestion that Yamala had approached and startled a sleeping Scott, provoking a spontaneous attack. The prosecution also referred to Scott's claims that he had stirred in the nights before the attack, believing he'd heard an intruder lurking outside his home. How, they questioned, could Scott be roused so easily then, but failed to awaken as his dying wife screamed for her life? The prosecution also cast a doubt on Scott's alleged history of sleepwalking. His sister Laura testified about the time Scott had supposedly thrown her across the kitchen while asleep. However, prosecutors highlighted that Laura never mentioned this incident to anyone until after Yarmila's murder, when she was the first to propose the sleepwalking theory. The prosecution emphasised how, after killing Yarmila, Scott had removed his bloody clothes, hidden them along with the knife in his car, cleaned himself up, tended to his own wounds and redressed. He then put on gloves before dragging Yarmila to the pool and drowning her. In total, they calculated that Scott had carried out 64 distinct actions from the beginning of the attack to its conclusion, a process they estimated had taken at least 45 minutes. The fellator's neighbour and key prosecution witness, Gregory Coons, provided a detailed account of many of Scott's behaviours, including him motioning for his dog to lie down, an action seen as too deliberate for someone supposedly unaware of their surroundings. Observers were left wondering, how could Scott recognise his dog but not his beloved wife? A sleep expert called by the prosecution said that Scott's actions were far too complex and methodical to have been done while asleep. While the expert acknowledged that sleepwalkers can interact with and misplace objects, he had never encountered a case where a sleepwalker intentionally hid something. Furthermore, the neat way Scott concealed the evidence in his car contradicted with the disorganised behaviour typical of sleepwalkers. But to the prosecution, what happened next was the strongest proof that Scott was fully awake when he killed Yarmila. Supported by their experts, the prosecution argued that sleepwalking violence only occurs when someone physically confronts the sleepwalker, obstructing their movements and inadvertently triggering a defensive response. However, Yamala's drowning did not fit this pattern. By that point, she was lying on the ground, gravely wounded and unable to pose any physical obstruction. According to the prosecution, this deliberate act of drowning demonstrated conscious intent rather than unconscious reflexive behaviour. To the defence, Scott's many illogical actions that night were, in and of themselves, evidence of his lack of conscious control. First, he attacked a woman he loved while their children were home, making no attempt to hide her body and leaving it in plain sight. After changing clothes, he moved Yarmla's body without any apparent concern about transferring her blood onto his new outfit. He also left the pool light on, unconcerned that it illuminated Yamala's body. Experts appearing on behalf of the defence chastised the prosecution for trying to invent a rational scenario out of something that was completely irrational. The defence also dismissed the prolonged timing of Scott's actions, pointing to the case of Kenneth Parks, whose sleepwalking episode which led to his acquittal for the murder and attempted murder of his in laws had lasted well over an hour. Gregory Coons witness account raised a significant question for the defence, one that Gregory himself couldn't explain. Why didn't he yell out to Scott to stop what he was doing to Yamala? In the defence's view, this action could have awakened Scott from his sleepwalking state and possibly prevented further harm. Scott's behaviour after police arrived was used to support the defence's narrative. Several individuals who confronted him that night described him as appearing dazed, detached and as if he had just woken up. When asked how many people were in the house, Scott replied four, and listed everyone, including his wife, to the defence. This suggested that Scott was unaware that Yarmila was lying dead outside. Homicide detective John Norman, who interviewed Scott immediately after the murder, saw his behaviour in a different light. He pointed out that Scott didn't seem very upset by the news of Yarmila's death and did not cry. Esteemed neurophysiologist Roger Broughton appeared on behalf of the defence to present his opinion that Scott had been sleepwalking the night he attacked Yamala. However, the courtroom was stunned during cross examination when the prosecution presented crucial facts Broughton had not previously known, including how Scott had interacted with his dog. Broughton said that these new details gave him pause regarding his initial conclusions. Broughton also admitted that he'd never encountered a sleepwalking case where someone had changed their clothes once, let alone two or even three times. Yet he remained adamant that sleepwalking was the best explanation of the facts. Although the prosecution posited several possible motives for Scott to kill Yamala, such as allegations of infidelity, none of these claims were substantiated by evidence. Attempts to argue Scott was a bad husband were counted by numerous character witnesses for the defence, who unanimously spoke highly of him. According to a close friend, Yarmila had once mentioned that Scott rummaged for clothes in the middle of the night while seemingly asleep. However, the witness admitted that she couldn't recall if Yarmila had specifically mentioned the word sleepwalking. Scott took the stand in an attempt to convince the jury of his state of mind at the time of the murder. His testimony began with a question from his attorney. If I'd been a fortune teller and I had come to you on the morning of January 16, 1997, and told you, Scott, tonight you're going to stab your wife 44 times, what would you have said to me? In response? Scott replied, you're out of your mind. There is just no way I would have done anything like this to my wife. I would never have envisioned something like this happening to someone like me, or especially to me personally. I don't know what I would do without her. As Scott's testimony progressed and he spoke about life without Yarmila, he broke down in tears. He described living two lives, one in reality, where he was confined to his jail cell, and the other in his dreams, where he imagined an idyllic life with his wife, as if nothing had ever happened. Whenever the prosecution posed a question that Scott couldn't answer, he deferred to the sleep experts testifying on his behalf. However, he did claim that Yarmila was aware of his sleepwalking and once told him about an instance where he had grabbed her arm while asleep, the prosecution attorney sharply responded, and she can't come in and testify, can she? Maintaining that he still had no memory of killing Yarmila, Scott tearfully told the it took me a very long time before I could really even admit it openly to myself that I had actually done that. When asked point blank if he knowingly killed his wife, Scott sobbed and replied.
