2 on Simpson Panel Tell of Abusive Women : Court: The defendant mutters, ‘Yes, yes’ as prospective jurors describe incidents. He has said he felt at times like a ‘battered husband.’

With the end of jury selection in the O.J. Simpson murder trial finally in sight, the judge and lawyers resumed the task of grilling jury candidates Tuesday and quickly found two who said they had experience with women striking their spouses--comments that appeared to hearten the football great, who has said he sometimes felt like a “battered husband.”

The first panelist interviewed Tuesday, a 49-year-old labor relations expert from Pico Rivera, said his wife had hit him and then falsely accused him of striking her. Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies were called, the man said.

“She was physically violent and threatening to you?” Deputy Dist. Atty. Marcia Clark asked the prospective juror.

“Yes,” the panelist responded.

That man was followed in the jury box by a 44-year-old aircraft mechanic who recalled his mother striking his stepfather.

On the exhaustive questionnaire completed by all jury prospects in the Simpson case, the man had written that he was aware of domestic violence between his mother and stepfather. Asked to explain his answer Tuesday, he said: “It wasn’t my stepfather jumping on my mother. It was probably the other way around.”

As those two men told their stories of domestic violence inflicted by women, Simpson smiled and muttered, “Yes, yes.”

In his now-famous open letter read on national television as police hunted for him, the football Hall of Famer wrote, “At times I have felt like a battered husband or boyfriend.” Simpson pleaded no contest to a battery charge in 1989, and police reports from that incident indicate that officers had come to his house on numerous occasions. Other allegations of abuse have been raised by friends and relatives of Nicole Brown Simpson.

Nevertheless, Simpson’s lawyers have said he never struck his wife, and they have moved to prevent prosecutors from using evidence of “marital discord” in their case. Simpson is charged with the June 12 murders of his ex-wife and Ronald Lyle Goldman. He has pleaded not guilty.

Both of the men who described their experiences with women striking their male spouses were allowed to remain on the panel of prospective alternate jurors. By day’s end, one more was added, bringing the total panel to 36 potential alternates--10 short of the number Superior Court Judge Lance A. Ito hopes to have in place by next week, when the two sides are to begin exercising peremptory challenges.

Jury selection in the Simpson case has dragged on for more than two months, with dozens of panelists excused for reasons ranging from media exposure to financial hardships to overt racial bias. That pattern continued Tuesday, as several prospective alternates were excused, some without even being questioned.

One woman was allowed to leave after informing the judge that she recently had lost her job and that jury service would create a financial hardship. Others were excused for questionnaire answers that made it appear unlikely they could serve impartially.

One prospective juror, for instance, said he would counsel a close friend or relative not to marry someone of a different race.

“God separated the races for a purpose, the same as with the animals, birds, fish, etc.,” that man, a 76-year-old retiree from West Hollywood, wrote in his questionnaire. When it came time to question that potential juror, lawyers for the defense and prosecution conferred briefly with Ito. The man was then dismissed.

Two other prospective alternates also were excused Tuesday without questioning. One said in his questionnaire that he thought Simpson was probably guilty, adding that he was not surprised when he heard Simpson had been arrested for the crimes.

Asked for his reaction to that news, that man responded on the questionnaire: “Not unexpected considering his past abuse of Nicole Simpson.”

Although jury selection is scheduled to conclude next week, it will give way to another set of contentious issues that must be resolved before evidence is presented.

Chief among the questions that the two sides will argue before the opening statements is the admissibility of DNA evidence, a bulwark of the prosecution case that Simpson’s attorneys are preparing to challenge. Ito has said he hopes to begin that hearing Dec. 12. It could last a month or more.

DNA tests are being conducted by two laboratories on opposite sides of the country, and results continue to trickle in. Tuesday, Ito told attorneys that he had received the latest batch, but he did not disclose the results in open court.

The trial teams for the DNA hearing still are taking shape, as Deputy Dist. Atty. Lisa Kahn is giving way to colleagues from Alameda and San Diego counties so that she can depart for maternity leave. Those colleagues, Rockne Harmon of Alameda County and George Clarke of San Diego County, made their first appearance in court last week.

The defense DNA team, meanwhile, is wrestling with a potential problem of its own: A New York judge on Monday threatened to jail one of Simpson’s DNA lawyers if he failed to show up for trial in an unrelated New York case that begins later this week.

After a shouting match between that judge and defense attorney Peter Neufeld, the judge proclaimed: “I order you to be here Dec. 1 and ready for trial. If you’re not ready, I will hold you in contempt and put you in jail.”

Neufeld appealed that order, but his appeal was denied Tuesday by a New York appellate judge.

On this side of the country, Simpson lawyer Johnnie L. Cochran Jr. said the defense might seek a delay in the DNA hearing if Neufeld cannot be in Los Angeles Dec. 12.

“We need him out here,” Cochran told reporters outside court. If no arrangements can be made to have Neufeld in Los Angeles next month, Cochran said Simpson’s lawyers might seek to delay the DNA hearing. But Simpson’s other lead attorney, Robert L. Shapiro, told reporters that the defense is eager to push forward.

“Mr. Neufeld has been ordered under penalty of contempt to be in court (in New York) Thursday,” Cochran told Ito in court. “If that happens, that could impact upon our Dec. 12 start date.”

Ito responded that he had spoken with the New York jurist, state Supreme Court Judge Harold Rothwax. But Ito said he was reluctant to interfere in a case.

Rothwax had told him the case in New York was expected to take two to three weeks to try, Ito said.

If Neufeld is forced to appear in the New York trial and the DNA hearing is delayed, it would push back opening statements in the Simpson case yet again, possibly until February. Ito said he would schedule other matters to be considered in the interim.

Court ended early Tuesday, and afterward the judge and lawyers took a short field trip to the jail where Simpson has been held since June 17. They spent about an hour there but declined comment on the reason for their visit.

“The judge has asked us not to comment, and we’re respecting that,” Shapiro said as he left. Simpson’s lawyers occasionally have raised concerns about their client’s conditions of incarceration, but sheriff’s officials would only say that the issue dealt with a matter that the defense had raised in a sealed motion.

Also Tuesday, Shapiro said it was forgivable that the emotionally involved family of Nicole Brown Simpson would prejudge his client, which prompted a response from the victim’s sister.

Denise Brown, who has been increasing assertive in recent weeks and has accused Simpson of killing her sister and Goldman, said in a statement late Tuesday that the family “is not, in Mr. Shapiro’s words, prejudging O.J. We leave that to the judge and jury in this case.”

However, she said: “We just want the people of this country to remember that he stands accused of committing a terrible crime. . . .

“Mr. Simpson’s defense team can posture and pose all they want to. That’s their right, and maybe even their job. But they can’t expect the family of Nicole Brown to turn the other cheek any longer,” she said.