THE O.J. SIMPSON MURDER TRIAL

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

PETER ARENELLA

On the defense: Now we know why the defense originally intended to close with Dr. Henry Lee. His testimony about two distinctive and different shoe imprints found on an envelope, the Bundy walkway and a piece of paper lends support to the defense’s two-killer theory. He also reminded the jury that he was prevented from doing more extensive analysis of the second imprint and that the police lost the piece of paper. But why no blood on these imprints?

On the prosecution: Chris Darden scored several points on cross. Christian Reichardt conceded that O.J. had been depressed over his on-again, off-again relationship with Nicole shortly before the murders. And Darden suggested how a guilty O.J. might have disposed of his bloody clothing--two hotel laundry bags never were found after he checked out. And why was there no blood on any of the broken glass? Important points, if the jury still has an open mind.

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the defense: The much-heralded Dr. Lee finally appeared before the jury. After spending an hour reviewing his credentials, he jumped into the heart of his testimony. Lee identified additional shoe prints at the crime scene--both on the walkway and on the bloody eyeglass envelope. While helping the defense’s multiple-murderer theory, Lee also said he saw Bruno Magli prints. The defense theory only works if O.J. wasn’t one of the killers.

On the prosecution: It is understandable why Hank Goldberg wants to limit Lee’s testimony. With his credentials, jurors may believe his every word. But Goldberg won’t know how big of a job he has to do until Judge Ito rules on the scope of Lee’s testimony. Meanwhile, Darden dangled tantalizing tidbits about evidence from Chicago. Police may know when O.J. came and went from his hotel room. Can they link those times to what happened to the murder weapon?

GIGI GORDON

On the defense: The defense is beginning to sound a bit like a Beckett play: “Waiting for Fuhrman.” The stage image that comes to mind is the Dream Team all treading water in Bob Shapiro’s swimming pool--you know, the one Mark Fuhrman wants to get in his suit. He might want to be careful, though. There are a lot of sharks waiting for him in those waters.

On the prosecution: Darden had a good day at the office. He took two defense witnesses and turned their testimony to his advantage. He got Reichardt to reveal a little more about the O.J.-Nicole relationship than the defense wanted to hear. And he got Chicago’s answer to Joe Friday to give him the facts--including the missing laundry bags. Juries love a mystery.

Compiled by Tim Rutten/Los Angeles Times