THE O.J. SIMPSON MURDER TRIAL

UCLA law professor Peter Arenella and Loyola University law professor Laurie Levenson offer their take on the Simpson trial. Joining them is Orange County attorney Edi M.O. Faal, who will rotate with other experts as the case moves forward. Today’s topics: Prosecutor Hank Goldberg begins direct examination of police forensics expert Gregory Matheson, and another juror is excused.

PETER ARENELLA

On the prosecution: “Ninety-eight days to get to the heart of their case, and the prosecution still is on the defensive. Goldberg used Matheson to rehabilitate the criminalists’ collection procedures. Matheson served that purpose well since he is an experienced witness who explained why many defense allegations are red herrings. But too much time was spent rebutting the defense and laying foundation for the prosecution’s best evidence: the blood test results.”

On the defense: “The defense cannot be happy about losing another juror. They know their best shot is with this jury. And with the dwindling number of alternates, the risk of a mistrial increases. They viewed the excused juror as pro-defense. Moreover, the new juror is a college graduate, who said on her questionnaire that she would expect Simpson to explain his whereabouts during the murders because he might have had a motive to kill his ex-wife.”

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the prosecution: “Matheson’s key role Monday was damage control. He emphasized that, even if the criminalists made mistakes, contamination would not magically change the blood at the crime scene into Simpson’s blood. As Goldberg put it, if a cat can collect evidence, so can LAPD criminalists. Matheson is a good witness and if the jurors believe anyone, it is likely to be him. That is important because he will be the first to give blood test results.”

On the defense: “Bob Blasier is about to make his debut before the jury. The defense would like to limit the impact of Matheson’s testimony and prevent the jury from hearing that defense experts also tested some of the blood. At the same time, the defense team probably is concerned about whether the new juror will help or hurt Simpson. Although she is an avowed USC football fan, she stated on voir dire that O.J. had a “visible motive” to kill his ex-wife.”

EDI M.O. FAAL

On the prosecution: “The prosecution spent a lot of time showing photos of the LAPD crime lab, trying to prove the lab was secure. If the prosecution fails to show that Simpson’s blood sample was well secured, they may have a problem overcoming the defense challenge that the sample was tampered with. Goldberg was trying to show that Matheson is highly competent. But it is premature to put a value on his performance until he is cross-examined.”

On the defense: “The defense camp is not celebrating, I’m sure. From all indications, it seems that the excused juror is someone the defense would have preferred to have on the panel. The new juror’s questionnaire response that Simpson had a ‘visible motive’ to kill Nicole may suggest that she will be more inclined toward the prosecution’s case. This is the best replacement juror the prosecution could dream of and the worst the defense could get.”

Compiled by HENRY WEINSTEIN / Los Angeles Times