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 Los Angeles defense lawyer Albert De Blanc Jr., who will rotate with other experts as the case moves forward. Today’s topic: The prosecution begins its presentation of blood evidence and defense lawyer Robert Blasier starts his cross-examination of police forensics expert Gregory Matheson.

PETER ARENELLA

On the prosecution: “To convict Simpson, the jury must believe his blood was at Bundy and Nicole Simpson’s blood was on his socks at Rockingham. They finally heard that testimony after Matheson cogently explained why blood under Nicole’s fingernails probably was hers and not from an unknown third party. Matheson is a godsend for the prosecution because he understands the need to educate the jurors and appears to have the ability to do so in a manner they can comprehend.”

On the defense: “It is Blasier’s job to sow seeds of doubt about the reliability of the blood evidence linking O.J. to the murders. To do so, he must at least confuse jurors about the significance of collection mistakes, potential contamination risks and shoddy testing procedures. To support the defense’s other theme of police corruption, Blasier must undermine Matheson’s rebuttal of the defense contention that a quarter of Simpson’s blood sample is unaccounted for.”

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the prosecution: “Finally. It took a long time, but Goldberg ultimately elicited from Matheson crucial test results showing that blood consistent with Nicole Simpson’s was found on O.J.’s socks and blood consistent with O.J.’s type was found at the crime scene. The prosecution also showed, albeit in a painstaking manner, why blood under Nicole’s fingernails is most likely hers and not a third party’s. Their charts helped boil down the information for the jury.”

On the defense: “Blasier started his cross-examination slowly. He fished for information on the other criminalists and made a short-lived attempt to attack Matheson’s qualifications. Blasier also tried to link criminalist Michele Kessler to a conspiracy because she is married to an LAPD officer. Next, he must attack the blood evidence, but Matheson has undermined defense claims that there is missing blood from Simpson’s vial to be used by alleged conspirators.”

ALBERT De BLANC JR.

On the prosecution: “This was a very good day for the prosecutors, as they began to present the core evidence intended to identify O.J. Simpson as the killer of Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman. Hank Goldberg and Matheson are doing a very good tandem job of teaching this jury the value of blood evidence for identification purposes. More than anything, the serology results chart is a graphic summary of the blood evidence and who it belongs to.”

On the defense: “Blasier has his work cut out for him. He will try to show that the serology tests are not strong evidence. However, he may have difficulty because these tests, when coupled with other evidence such as motive and the trail of blood at Rockingham, weigh heavily in pointing to Simpson as the killer. The defense will have to spend more time developing its conspiracy theory, but so far this is only an accusation, unsupported by any evidence.”

Compiled by HENRY WEINSTEIN / Los Angeles Times