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 Santa Monica defense lawyer Paul Mones, who will rotate with other experts as the case moves forward. Today’s topic: Prosecutor Rock Harmon starts his direct examination of California Department of Justice criminalist Gary Sims.

PETER ARENELLA

On the prosecution: “Harmon’s direct examination of Sims mirrored the criminalist’s microscopic examination of Simpson’s blood-stained socks: painstaking and at times pain-inducing attention to minute details. Some were very significant: one blood-spatter stain on a sock was consistent with someone walking through a pool of blood. Others were trivial. But the bottom line was damning: Nicole’s blood on the socks and Ron Goldman’s blood on the Rockingham glove.”

On the defense: “The defense hired some of the nation’s best forensic experts to support their claim that DNA test results should not be trusted. But Harmon is trying to convert one of these experts, Edward Blake, into a ‘silent’ witness for the prosecution. Harmon hopes that his repeated references to Blake’s presence during the state agency’s testing, when combined with his expected failure to testify, will lead jurors to conclude that those results must be unassailable.”

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the prosecution: “Solid as a rock. The prosecution aired O.J.’s dirty laundry. With Nicole’s blood on O.J.’s sock and Goldman’s blood inside the Rockingham glove, O.J. began to face a mountain of DNA evidence. Robin Cotton had done a great job of putting O.J.’s blood at the crime scene. Sims’ testimony, however, may overshadow those results by putting the victims’ blood at O.J.’s house. Harmon and Sims combined to present amazingly clear results.”

On the defense: “Just when the defense thought it couldn’t get any worse, Sims and Harmon have begun to present incredibly damaging DNA results. The defense will have to retreat to its usual contamination and conspiracy themes, but Barry Scheck will have a much more difficult time with Sims than he did with Dennis Fung. As an expert who has worked for defense lawyers, Sims is not as vulnerable to an attack based on bias.”

PAUL MONES

On the prosecution: “Harmon, in his meticulous examination of Sims, was attempting to insulate him from criticism directed at Cotton, primarily by showing that he is a state employee who works for the citizens of California and that his lab passed proficiency tests with flying colors. The critical purpose of Sims’ testimony is that it will provide corroboration of Cotton’s findings from tests done at Cellmark.”

On the defense: “The defense was between a rock and a hard place. The frequent mention of their expert, Edward Blake, raised the specter that not only were blood samples seen by him but that certain samples were given to him. Scheck fought very hard, but unsuccessfully, to keep the jury from hearing that defense experts had in any way examined the samples. However, Scheck can be expected to provide a thorough attack on the meaning of the PCR test results.”

Compiled by HENRY WEINSTEIN / Los Angeles Times