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 former Los Angeles County District Attorney Ira Reiner. Today’s topic: An FBI agent goes to Italy and F. Lee Bailey comes up with an amazing theory.

PETER ARENELLA

On the prosecution: “William Bodziak, an FBI expert, bolstered both the single assailant theory and the coroner’s account of how Nicole was killed. Only one pair of size 12 designer shoeprints was found at Bundy and one of those prints was on the back of Nicole’s dress. But the connection between those shoes and O.J. must be strengthened.”

On the defense: “Bizarre and sad. Attorney F. Lee Bailey helped the prosecution by eliciting Bodziak’s explanation for the odd single shoeprint pattern. His suggestion the killer had returned after leaving appeared more plausible than Bailey’s: that two brilliant killers had worn the same size and style shoes to fool police into thinking there was one killer.”

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the prosecution: “One step at a time. Prosecutors had the good sense to know that domestic violence evidence would not erase the image of the botched glove demonstration. But a trail of bloody shoeprints might. Bodziak tied those prints at the crime scene to a pair of Bruno Maglis. Now the question is whether the prosecution can tie the Maglis to O.J.”

On the defense: “How did Bailey do that cross examination with a straight face? Bodziak quickly dismissed Bailey’s suggestion that two assailants both wearing Magli shoes, even if they didn’t fit, took itty bitty steps at the crime scene. Bailey also opened the door for Bodziak to give an eerie description of how the assailant returned to the scene.”

IRA REINER

On the prosecution: “A telling detail--the killer wearing rare Italian shoes--could be the coup de grace after the DNA evidence. Those shoes aren’t the kind a Colombian narcotics hit man would be likely to wear, but they might be typical of O.J.’s wardrobe. After last week’s glove disaster though, prosecutors may have to prove O.J. bought a pair of Maglis.”

On the defense: “Bailey accomplished nothing on cross examination, except floating the defense’s most preposterous theory yet: that two killers independently purchased this rare shoe in a size 12 and wore them so they could fool the police. The fact that the expert witness dismissed it as nonsense doesn’t mean we won’t hear about it again.”

Compiled by HENRY WEINSTEIN / Los Angeles Times