OP's entire defense rests on one condition: The only screaming that anybody head was OP's, and it occurred AFTER the gunshots. If RS made any sounds OP is guilty of premeditated murder. Here are the sounds according to OP: Bathroom window opening, Somebody in the bathroom, OP yelling to RS to call police, OP yelling to intruder to leave, 4 gun shots, OP yelling to RS to call police, OP screaming out of balcony for help, Cricket bat hitting bathroom door. For OP's defense to work only the last two sounds could have been heard by any of the four ear-witnesses. Here are the sounds according to witnesses: woman screaming in fear, man and woman arguing, gun shots, Man screaming help, woman screaming for help, OP saying everything is fine, OP crying over phone For OP's story to make sense, the witnesses must be mistaken about: woman screaming in fear, man and woman arguing, gun shots, Man screaming help, woman screaming for help, OP saying everything is fine, OP crying over phone Finally, for OP's version to be believable, a remarkable coincidence must HAVE occured: The ear witnesses must have made two mistakes: 1) they must have mistaken the cricket bat hitting the door for gunshots, and 2) they must have mistaken OPs screams for help with a woman's. What's remarkable about this is the witnesses must have mistakenly heard sounds (4 gunshots) that actually were made prior to the witnesses mistakenly hearing them! What are the odds? That's like saying the witnesses thought they saw Britney Spears walking down the street, but it was actually Lindsay Lohan. And coincidentally Britney Spears just walked down the street 3 minutes before. Is that a reasonable coincidence? In other words, OP unloaded four gun shots, but according to OP all the witnesses who claimed to hear those gunshots were mistaken. They really didn't hear gunshots, even though just moments before there were actual gunshots to be heard. Now combine that with a woman being shot dead who according to OP didn't make one sound. But the same witnesses who didn't hear the four gunshots that actually happened also were mistaken about hearing a woman screaming. Four witnesses, all mistaken about two things: Hearing gunshots that actually did occur, and hearing a woman screaming the same night a woman is shot to death in OP's house. But that's not all... ALL four witnesses ALL made the exact same mistakes! All didn't really hear the gunshots that actually occurred, and all heard a woman scream the night a woman was found shot to death in OP's house. In summary, for OP's defense to work, this is what had to happen: RS goes to pee, doesn't speak or call out OP kill her, shooting gun four times, Nobody hears gunshots, Everybody hears OP scream and thinks it's a woman, OP hits door with cricket bat, Everybody thinks bat hitting door is the same sound, the 4 gunshots, that occurred when OP actually did kill RS. Is this reasonable? Nobody heard the actual gun shots that really occurred, but thought they heard them?