THE O.J. SIMPSON MURDER TRIAL

UCLA law professor Peter Arenella and Loyola Law School professor Laurie Levenson offer their take on the Simpson trial. Joining them is defense attorney Gigi Gordon, who will rotate with other experts as the case moves forward. Today’s topic: Coroner overkill?

PETER ARENELLA

On the prosecution: “Today’s lesson in forensics: Determining time of death is an imprecise science with a three-hour time estimate being about the best that can be done. The chief coroner insisted that if everything had been done correctly as soon as the victims were discovered, he still would not have been able to tell whether they were killed at 10:15 or close to 11. Did we really need eight days of testimony to eliminate a defense red herring?”

On the defense: “Robert Shapiro started very strongly by exploiting the most unusual aspects of the chief coroner’s testimony: Its extended duration and that he was giving it instead of Dr. Irwin Golden. The coroner could not say that the forensic evidence supported the prosecution’s single-assailant, single-weapon theory with a reasonable degree of medical certainty. Having listened to eight days of this, the jury may be wondering why Golden really was absent.”

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the prosecution: “Brian Kelberg’s love of detail was almost fatal to his case. In an effort to cross every t and dot every i, he stretched out the coroner’s testimony. Time of death is important, but undigested pieces of rigatoni and olives won’t give the answer. Neither will charts on liver, brain and rectal temperatures. It was time for Kelberg to finish his direct examination before rigormortis set into the courtroom.”

On the defense: “Shapiro’s cross-examination got off to a fast start. He hit hard on the weaknesses in the coroner’s testimony. The coroner cannot state with certainty the time of death, how many people did the killings or who they were. For the defense, these are the big ticket items. Shapiro also took a familiar approach--he put the prosecutors on trial, especially for not calling Golden.”

GIGI GORDON

On the prosecution: “Kelberg’s examination was phenomenal--the only problem was that it wasn’t delivered before students at a forensic pathology institute. They might have found it interesting, but it is doubtful the jurors were as fascinated as Kelberg was. He did what seemed impossible just a short week ago: He obscured the fact that this case is about two murdered people.”

On the defense: “In four minutes, Shapiro established the Golden Rule--that a 2 1/2-hour autopsy will yield just four facts, though it takes eight days to drag them out. The question now is whether Shapiro--unlike everyone else in this soap opera--will be able to dismantle the illusion of medical certainty in as little time as it took Golden to do the examinations.”

Compiled by TIM RUTTEN / Los Angeles Times