Image--Not Just Facts--Is Important Aspect of Attorneys’ Strategies

Even though the opening of Thursday’s hearing for accused killer O.J. Simpson was technical and sometimes tedious, it was easy to see the way both sides are engaged in image-making.

Prosecutor Marcia Clark came across as a hard-working underdog, an underpaid public servant pitted against an expensive and flashy defense.

Underdog is the operative word from the district attorney’s office. In private, “don’t quote me” conversations away from the court, the D.A. crew says it’s in for a difficult fight. This is the diminished-expectations spin, a staple of political campaign managers and football coaches who don’t want the press to portray their side as the favorite. Victory then becomes a greater surprise and defeat doesn’t tarnish their reputations.

On the defense side, Simpson attorney Robert L. Shapiro mounted a total, don’t-give-an-inch attack on the prosecution on behalf of a client who, in court Thursday, looked like the O.J. Simpson of the Hertz ads, a businessman on the go rather than a troubled suspect on the run.

These images went out to a huge television audience, shaping impressions of the case, sparking discussions and arguments, working their way into the consciousness of millions, including those few Los Angeles County residents who will serve on the Simpson jury if he goes to trial.

*

Part of the image-making was strictly image. Simpson’s appearance was an example of that. He was looking good in a deep blue suit, a crisp white shirt and a sharp but conservative red-and-blue patterned tie. It was a marked difference from the tieless man who appeared on Tuesday, looking like a man under a suicide watch, which he was.

I wasn’t surprised at the new Simpson. Defense attorney Shapiro--now with a client allowed to wear a necktie--was able to follow his own advice. I’d just read an article by him, written more than a year ago, on how to groom a client to make a good impression on the press and the public.

Jailed clients, he wrote, should be well-groomed and in civilian clothes. He explained why: “Television producers are notorious for editing in pictures of your client in the most unflattering light. Their preference is for pictures taken immediately upon arrest or transportation to court after your client has been up all night, unkempt and in jail clothes. They will continue to edit in this picture months after the fact. When this has happened, I have called station news directors and producers and told them my concerns. . . . Almost all were sensitive to my request and stopped running the negative photograph.”

It was more than Simpson’s attire. He looked alert as he watched the proceedings, occasionally taking notes.

For Simpson, the preliminary hearing is producing a new picture of him, replacing in news files--and the public’s mind--those from the night of his arrest and earlier court appearances.

Just as interesting was the clash between Shapiro and prosecutor Clark.

Clark called an expert witness, Michele Kestler, the Los Angeles police crime lab manager, who testified about hair, blood samples and other evidence.

Kestler fit the underpaid, public-payroll look of the prosecution side. She worked her way through the ranks, attending the FBI lab school, taking more courses, finally winning a management job.

Shapiro treated Kestler with scorn. He insisted on seeing her resume, forcing a recess until she walked over to police headquarters to retrieve it from her computer.

He compared her unfavorably with his expert, Dr. Henry Lee, director of the Connecticut State Police crime lab and a man who has investigated more than 5,000 murders. Lee, Shapiro noted, had a 50-page curriculum vitae.

Clark treated Shapiro with condescension, referring to him as if he were a well-intentioned empty head.

At one point, she told Judge Kathleen Kennedy-Powell that Shapiro needs an expert at his side so he’ll understand what crime experts are saying. “I am trying to assist counsel in being more effective,” she said. Shapiro, returning her condescension with sarcasm, said, “I certainly appreciate that.”

*

Clark is doing something else worth noting. Over and over again, she has said the prosecution has nothing to hide, that she wants Shapiro to have all the evidence. Of course, the promise isn’t necessary. The law gives the defense the right to what’s in the prosecution’s hands.

But it’s part of the D.A.’s spin. The techniques of politics help explain it.

Last week, 911 tapes were released, hinting at a domestically violent Simpson and hurting his image. Garcetti afterward deplored the release of the tapes, which police said they gave out reluctantly after news media requests. Nevertheless, the airing of the tapes had the impact of a negative bombshell in a political campaign, especially coming after a weekend of Garcetti appearances on national television.

Now, in court, the D.A.’s office is turning to positive campaigning, adopting an image familiar to all of us who have ever read a children’s book: “The Little Engine That Could.”