THE O.J. SIMPSON MURDER TRIAL

UCLA law professor Peter Arenella and Loyola Law School professor Laurie Levenson offer their take on the O.J. Simpson trial. Joining them is USC law professor Erwin Chemerinsky, who will rotate with other experts as the case moves forward. Today’s topic: Big win for the defense on the Mark Fuhrman tapes.

PETER ARENELLA

On the defense: “The Simpson jury may soon hear Fuhrman uttering the ‘N-word,’ something he denied under oath. But the more damaging aspect of the tapes is Fuhrman’s remark about destroying licenses so blacks could be arrested for driving without one. If jurors believe Fuhrman was describing his practices, not simply spinning a tale, then his willingness to fabricate charges and commit perjury may generate belief in the conspiracy theory.”

On the prosecution: “If Judge Lance A. Ito admits the tapes and they reveal that Fuhrman was describing his views and practices, the prosecution has a difficult choice. They could defend Fuhrman’s character or concede his racism, but insist it isn’t proof of an elaborate conspiracy. The first option forces them to play on the defense’s turf; the second puts them in the unenviable position of admitting Fuhrman is a perjurer but told the truth about not planting the glove.”

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the defense: “Big boost for the defense. A North Carolina court breathed life back into the conspiracy theory by ordering production of tapes allegedly showing Fuhrman a racist. Now the defense has to convince Ito that the tapes are more relevant than inflammatory and persuade jurors that if Fuhrman is a racist he planted evidence against O.J. Just in case the defense is unsuccessful on either front, they continue to push their contamination theory.”

On the prosecution: “Not one of their better days. The North Carolina reprieve was short-lived, and Woody Clarke had to continue sparring with John Gerdes over DNA contamination. Clarke had two key points: Gerdes may be cheating a bit reading DNA results, and there are results that can’t be explained away by contamination. But the jurors’ attention may degrade faster than DNA, leaving them with only the word ‘contamination’ ringing in their ears.”

ERWIN CHEMERINSKY

On the defense: “An excellent day. First, the North Carolina ruling could give the defense its most important evidence if the tapes include Fuhrman using epithets and talking of framing blacks. Second, Barry Scheck reinforced his key point with Gerdes: contamination in the crime lab makes all the blood evidence suspect. Finally, Terrence Speed testified that prosecution DNA statistics are inflated: they fail to account for errors in handling and by labs.”

On the prosecution: “After three days of very technical questioning, Clarke concluded his cross of Gerdes by emphasizing the strength of the prosecution’s case: the many different types of tests at many different labs, all incriminating O.J. Clark emphasize how the PCR tests that Gerdes criticized often were confirmed by RFLP and traditional blood-testing results. But Clarke never could undermine Gerdes’ conclusion about extensive contamination in the crime lab.”

Compiled by HENRY WEINSTEIN / Los Angeles Times