First-degree murder trial sees tense exchange between prosecutor, accused

A break-in and an intruder running off into the night.

Nearly 20 late-night phone calls made by an unknown person inside an apartment suite.

The mysterious appearance of a black suitcase outside a hotel in Morinville, Alta.

Bloody evidence from a crime scene planted among boxes and luggage.

These are some of the explanations Beryl Musila offered Tuesday about the events around Ronald Worsfold's death as she tried to refute the Crown's version of how he was killed on July 7, 2017.

Musila, who is on trial for first-degree murder, does not have a lawyer and is representing herself. The jury trial in Edmonton's Court of King's Bench is in its seventh week.

The accused argues she was set up by someone to take the fall for 75-year-old Worsfold's death. At the beginning of the trial, she pleaded not guilty to the murder charge, but guilty to indecent interference with Worsfold's remains. 

For the first six weeks of the trial, Crown prosecutors John Schmidt and Patricia Hankinson called evidence arguing that Musila, who was living with Worsfold in St. Albert at the time of his death, drugged him with Ativan and then panicked when she believed he'd overdosed.

They argue she decided to kill Worsfold, and that she committed the murder by beating him with a hammer and stabbing him with a knife.

Musila began calling evidence in her own defence on Monday, and was her own first witness. She testified she believed she'd been framed for the murder.

That theory and the prosecution's theory of the killing clashed as Musila answered questions during a tense cross-examination by Schmidt on Tuesday.

Asked about the events of the evening of July 7, 2017, Musila said she and Worsfold both took Ativan. She said after the older man went to bed, she caught someone breaking into their apartment suite. 

Musila said she chased the person out of the building, but lost them. 

Schmidt suggested to her that there was no intruder.