After a three-month trial which included around 60 witness and more than 100 exhibits, the fate of accused murderer Christina Asp is now in the hands of the jury.

Ten women and two men now have to decide what role, if any, Asp played in the 2008 death of Gordon Seybold.

Deliberations began at around 1:30 p.m. Thursday after the group spent more than three hours listening to final instructions from Yukon Supreme Court Justice Leigh Gower.

After being unable to reach a verdict last night, they were sent to a hotel. Deliberations resumed this morning.

Asp is charged with first-degree murder in connection with Seybold's death.

The 63-year-old's body was found after his Ibex Valley cabin burned to the ground on March 26, 2008.

In his 100-page final instructions, Gower encouraged the jury to take the time to listen to each other's opinions and discuss their thoughts openly.

"Keep an open mind but not an empty head,” he said.

Aside from first-degree murder, the jury also has the option of finding Asp guilty of second-degree murder, manslaughter or not guilty of anything, the judge said.

Whether she is found guilty of murder will depend on whether the jury believes Asp had the intent to kill Seybold or at least the intent to cause him bodily harm knowing it would likely kill him.

They will then have to decide if they believe Seybold's death was "planned and deliberate,” and therefore first degree, the judge said.

Manslaughter, on the other hand, is causing someone's death without the planning or intention to kill.

At its core, the case comes down to whether the jury believes what Asp told undercover officers about Seybold's death, or what she testified to in court.

The 34-year-old was the focus of an extensive undercover police operation, dubbed Project Monsoon.

During that time, she was convinced she had been welcomed into a powerful crime family with the ability to cover up crimes from the police.

Throughout the trial, the jury heard a number of recordings where Asp tells her new friends that she and her boyfriend, Norman Larue, went to Seybold's house, where the two men began fighting.

When Seybold appeared to get the upper hand on her boyfriend, Asp tells the officers she hit him three times with a bat.

During the trial, she took the stand denying her role in the attack, claiming she just watched while Larue attacked Seybold.

She testified that she exaggerated her role in the death as a way to impress her new bosses and maintain the job and lifestyle they were providing for her.

Her lawyer claims this is a case of a false confession, and his client is not guilty of anything.

He points to some of the earlier recordings where Asp does not mention having a role in Seybold's death.

The Crown says the fact her role was elaborated on later is a sign of trust developing between Asp and the officers.

She had no reason to lie, they say.

The jury has been provided with a big-screen TV and audio equipment, if they want to re-listen to any of the recordings.

What may have motivated Seybold's death has never been clear.

In some of the recordings, Asp tells the undercover officers it was her mother, Jessie Asp, who wanted Seybold to die.

Other times, she says, she just thought Larue was to beat Seybold to get him to leave her mother alone.

Jessie Asp took the stand during the trial and told the jury she didn't have a problem with Seybold.

She testified she recently remembered telling the couple to stay away from Seybold when Larue spoke of plans to rob him.

If the jury believes it was Larue who killed Seybold, they could still find Asp guilty, Gower explained.

If the jury believes beyond a reasonable doubt that Asp knew her boyfriend's intentions that morning and acted in a way intending to help him, she could still be found guilty.

Beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean something far-fetched or frivolous, but is based on reason and common sense, Gower said.

On the stand, Asp insisted she didn't know where the pair was going when they left her mother's house in Whitehorse.

She testified that when she realized where they were headed, she didn't know what would happen, but did provide her boyfriend with directions to the remote property.

The Crown alleges that Asp also drew a map of Seybold's property before his death.

An expert witness testified during the trial that she was able to match the printing on the map to Asp's writing.

Other writing was never identified.

Asp told the court she doesn't remember anything about the map.

Prosecutors also allege that Asp helped her boyfriend enter the cabin by knocking on the door while he was waiting around the corner.

Her presence at the crime scene does not by itself make Asp an aider, the judge said. She had to actually do something.

Lastly, if the jury decides Asp and Larue went to Seybold's with a "common unlawful purpose” of assaulting or robbing Seybold and it was Larue who killed him, Asp could still be found guilty.

As of the Star's press deadline early this afternoon, the jury had not returned with a unanimous verdict.

This was the territory's first "mega trial”, meaning 14 people were originally chosen to sit on the jury.

This was to allow for enough jurors to try the case if one or two were unable to complete the lengthy trial.

In the end, the extra jurors were not necessary, and two were excused Thursday before deliberations began.

See related story below.