The public prosecutor claims that the killing began with a fierce argument, in which the man drew a knife on the woman and cut her. According to their case, she then struck the man twice, injuring him gravely, and leading her to believe he was dead.
They claim she smashed a window and created a trail of bloody shoe prints to implicate an anonymous intruder.
At the centre of the case is a recording of the woman's call to emergency services, where noises from the crime scene can be heard.
The prosecutor says those noises are the sound of the man regaining consciousness, and the woman finishing him off with a heavy object.
The defence, however, says that statements made about that call show that someone else was at the scene of the crime. They also claim that the prosecution's forensic evidence is deficient. For example, they point to a brown fibre that was found at the crime scene and on the victim, but not on the defendant herself. They argue the fibre came from the real assailant.
The defence points out that the woman was in life-threatening danger herself, as the knife cut she sustained was near her heart.
The couple's children are witnesses, as they were in the house at the time.
The trial is expected to last 12 days.
