Crime House 24/7: “The Science Behind the Verdict: Scott Falater’s Final Judgment (Part 3)”

Podcast: Crime House 24/7
Host: Katie Ring (Night Watch)
Date: February 19, 2026

Episode Overview

In this gripping Night Watch episode, Katie Ring brings listeners to the final chapter of the “Sleepwalking Murder” case: the 1999 trial of Scott Falater, accused of brutally murdering his wife, Yarmila, while allegedly sleepwalking. The episode explores the courtroom drama as Falater bravely takes the stand, the science and controversy behind sleepwalking defenses, the jury's decision, and how this Arizona case echoes the landmark Canadian trial of Kenneth Parks. The episode grapples with the unsettling question: Can someone truly kill without awareness? And if so, where does legal responsibility begin and end?

Key Discussion Points and Insights

Scene Setting: The Murder and Its Aftermath

• The Crime:

  • On January 16, 1997, Scott Falater was arrested after his wife Yarmila was found stabbed and drowned in their backyard pool ([00:42]).
  • Neighbor eyewitnesses reportedly saw Scott commit the act.
  • The defense admitted Scott killed Yarmila but claimed he was sleepwalking.

• The Stakes:

  • The trial set up the rare and controversial sleepwalking (non-insane automatism) defense, pitting physical evidence and expert testimony against neuroscience and personal history.

The Courtroom Battle: Science vs. Interpretation

• Prosecution’s Argument ([01:09]):

  • Scott’s actions — stabbing, controlling the struggle, moving the body, drowning Yarmila, hiding evidence, changing clothes — were “too complex” for sleepwalking, requiring “sustained awareness, coordination and decision making.”

• Defense’s Argument ([01:32]):

  • Scott’s behaviors aligned with his routine; sleep studies and genetics suggested a genuine predisposition.
  • Family history and expert testimony (notably Dr. Rosalind Cartwright) pointed to a genetic sleep disorder making violent sleepwalking plausible.

• Central Question:

  • Not whether sleepwalkers can commit violence, but whether Scott was truly asleep during the entire event.

Scott Falater Takes the Stand

• Risk and Motivation:
  • Despite standard legal advice, Scott testified to “take control of his narrative” ([02:29]).
• Testimony Details ([02:50-05:36]):
  • Scott expressed his initial skepticism about the defense, considering a burglary scenario but trusted the neighbor’s account.
  • Underwent a polysomnogram (sleep study)—results showed reduced slow wave (deep) sleep, making sleepwalking more likely under his stress.
  • He described living with a diagnosis of non insane automatism and a long sleepwalking history.
  • Heartfelt statement: “He loved Yarmila more than anything and didn’t know what to do without her,” his voice breaking as he looked towards his children ([05:17]).
  • “All the scientific jargon and diagnosis were beside the point. He expressed his utter devastation at the loss of his wife and said her murder would haunt him forever.”

The Jury Deliberates: Verdict and Sentencing

• Jury Decision ([08:27]):

  • After six weeks and eight hours of deliberation, Scott was found guilty of first-degree murder.
  • Jurors partly believed he “might have begun stabbing his wife while sleepwalking, but couldn’t believe he remained unconscious through the whole sequence—especially the drowning and staging of the scene.”

• Sentencing:

  • Avoided the death penalty based on support from family (including Yarmila’s mother) and his children, Michael and Megan, who pleaded for leniency.
  • Sentenced to life in prison without parole.

• Aftermath:

  • Multiple appeals citing new sleep science denied; court maintained that Scott remained “a danger to society.”
  • Scott, in a 2021 interview, maintained he had “no memory” of that night: “The responsibility was his alone, even if he didn’t recall committing it.” ([09:52])
  • Scott now mentors others in prison; his children have gone on to successful careers.

Wider Context: The Kenneth Parks Precedent

• Retelling the Parks Case ([11:34-18:28]):

  • In 1987, Kenneth Parks drove 14 miles while asleep and killed his mother-in-law, but turned himself in immediately, confused and injured.
  • Parks was acquitted in Canada, as the court found his actions were “non insane automatism”—no conscious criminal intent.

• Comparing Precedents ([18:28]):

  • Kenneth Parks “made no attempt to hide evidence,” while Scott Falater was accused of cleaning up and staging.
  • Both cases turned on “interpretation of behavior after the crimes”—the decisive factor for the juries.

• Memorable Reflection:

  • “Science could only describe possibility, not intent. And so the burden shifted back to the jury, forced to interpret behavior, sequence and credibility where medicine reached its limits.” ([18:56])

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• On the risk of testifying:

  • “Defendants rarely testify in their own murder trials because every expression, every answer, and any hint of anger will be used against them.” (Katie Ring, [02:29])

• Scott Falater’s emotional testimony:

  • “He loved Yarmila more than anything and didn’t know what to do without her … he begged the judge and jury to let him reunite with [his children].” (Katie Ring, [05:17])

• On science vs. justice:

  • “The sleep study couldn’t recreate the night Yarmila died. It could only suggest a vulnerability, not prove what Scott was doing in those final moments.” (Katie Ring, [04:26])

• Key insight on legal responsibility:

  • “Once courts accept that sleep can absolve responsibility, they must decide where that acceptance ends.” (Katie Ring, [21:42])

• Closing thoughts:

  • “Taken together, the cases of Kenneth Parks and Scott Falater do not resolve the mystery of sleepwalking and violence. They deepen it… In the end, these cases do not ask whether the men were sleeping or awake. They ask something far more unsettling. How much control do any of us really have once we close our eyes?” (Katie Ring, [22:56])

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Case Background & Sleepwalking Defense: [00:42]–[02:27]
• Scott Falater Takes the Stand: [02:29]–[05:36]
• Jury Deliberation and Aftermath: [08:27]–[11:29]
• Kenneth Parks Case Overview: [11:34]–[18:28]
• Comparative Analysis & Reflections: [18:28]–[22:56]
• Final Thoughts/Closing: [22:56]–[23:24]

Conclusion & Thematic Reflection

This episode powerfully demonstrates how the collision between modern neuroscience and old questions of justice can unsettle even seasoned jurors and listeners. With compelling storytelling and careful analysis, Katie Ring shows how, in the end, “the mystery of sleepwalking and violence” is unresolved—justice and science each have their limits, and the darker corners of the mind still escape full understanding.

For listeners seeking to understand the boundaries of culpability, the challenge of forensic science, and the haunting ambiguity at the heart of the “sleepwalking defense,” this episode is both essential and unsettling.