Talk:Sleepwalking (What is Worse, Not Sleeping or Not Knowing?)/@comment-31077845-20170307233852

The story was good enough, but I found myself getting to a point where I was thinking "Ok, let's get to the point already", made worse as it seemed like almost every paragraph ended with a series of questions that were all already either implied or almost identical to previous questions. Yes, we know, you don't know what sleeping you is doing and the thought frightens you, we understand.

But fun fact, sleepwalking IS a possible defence in court. When it comes to sleepwalking there are actually specific tests that are used to determine whether or not someone is at risk for sleepwalking and to what extent; people have been known to walk, engage in very simple conversations, drive, all kinds of stuff while sleepwalking. Oddly enough there's precedence for almost this exact scenario: I read this a bit back so I may not be 100% on the details, but at one point a guy showed up at a police station covered in blood and said "I think I may have killed someone". I'm hazy on this part, but I think it turned out the guy had murdered his wife's parents? It was something like that. However it was case where he had no motive, no criminal history, and he claimed it was actually a huge bout of sleep walking. After administering tests the results backed up his claim as they showed his brainwave patterns were consistent with an individual who would suffer from severe sleepwalking, so with sleepwalking seeming like the more plausible explanation he wasn't convicted. I'd like to think there was more, like that he had to get treatment or something what with the "killing people in his sleep" thing, but that much I don't know.