THE O.J. SIMPSON MURDER TRIAL : Experts See Peril in Possible Payment by County to Juror : Psychology: If Ito covers the woman’s $3,000 rental loss, other panelists may feel resentment, which could make agreement on a verdict more difficult, some say.

Experts in jury psychology cautioned Monday that it could cause more trouble than it’s worth if Judge Lance A. Ito decides to pay a juror’s $3,000 loss to keep her on the case.

The eventual cost of an outright gift to Juror No. 1290--a 60-year-old retired gas company clerk from Norwalk who said she was losing the money on a vacant rental property--could be a hung jury in O.J. Simpson’s double murder trial if other jurors learn of the arrangement, some of the experts said. They called Ito’s decision to consider the payment unheard-of.

The $3,000 would be more than twice the $1,220 each of the panel members has earned for the eight months they have been sequestered, receiving a stipend of $5 a day.

“Giving a monetary sum to one juror and not the others could increase the likelihood that the jury would not get along as a group,” said psychologist Matt Milano, a jury consultant for a San Francisco-based firm that provides trial services for attorneys. “And if that creates different factions within the jury, the chances of a unanimous verdict are significantly decreased.”

That view was echoed by another psychologist, Rubin Orive, who does jury consulting for a Culver City trial-services firm.

“If other jurors hear about it, they would certainly question why this one juror got a windfall and they didn’t,” Orive said. “If there is any kind of tension in the group . . . it could arouse some negative feelings among [other jurors] who feel they are deprived.”

Moreover, he added, such a gift could create a bond between the receiver and Ito that does not exist between the judge and the other 11 jurors and two alternates.

According to sources familiar with the situation, Juror No. 1290 told Ito she could not remain on the panel because she was losing money on a rental property that has been vacant since July.

Robert Hirschorn, a Texas-based jury consultant, had even stronger reservations about the possible gift.

“Jurors have a tendency, as all people do, to be beholden to the entity that pays them,” Hirschorn said. “Since Judge Ito and Marcia Clark both get their paychecks from the same source, the juror will feel beholden to the entity that paid her, and that entity, I fear, could be the prosecution.”

That apparently is the fear of Johnnie L. Cochran Jr., Simpson’s lead lawyer, who raised the same issue in open court Monday, saying any gift to the juror would be “unacceptable” and vowing to appeal it.

Ito, who decided to consider having the county help the juror financially, insisted that such an action has a precedent but did not elaborate.

Harlan Braun, a prominent Los Angeles defense lawyer, could think of no other case involving the same circumstances that face Ito, but cited an analogy that might, he said, be the basis of the judge’s action.

“There have been some cases in the past when jurors ran out of pay [from their employers] and the county paid them,” said Braun, who was alone among those interviewed by The Times who would applaud such a move.

Rick Vandenberg, the county accountant-auditor who keeps track of the cost of the Simpson trial, said the money Ito is considering awarding Juror No. 1290 would probably come from the Superior Court’s budget.

Through July, he said, the trial had cost the county $7.1 million.