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 Georgetown Law professor Paul Rothstein, who will rotate with other experts as the case moves forward. Today’s topic: Shoe prints revisited.

PETER ARENELLA

On the prosecution: Marcia Clark used shoe-expert extraordinaire, William Bodziak, to invalidate Dr. Henry Lee’s findings of evidence ‘consistent’ with a second set of shoe prints. With precision and certainty, Bodziak concluded that the bloody prints on the envelope and paper were not shoe prints and that no second set of shoe prints was on Ron Goldman’s jeans. If jurors believe Bodziak, the defense’s two-killer theory just took a serious hit.

On the defense: Barry Scheck’s cross of fiber expert Doug Deedrick made a simple point: I know Dr. Henry Lee and you, sir, are no Dr. Lee! Why should jurors trust Deedrick when he lacks Lee’s expertise? But this line of attack won’t work on Bodziak because he, unlike Lee, is a shoe print expert. Scheck must foster doubt in jurors’ minds about how Bodziak can be so certain--such doubt may be enough for a jury too tired to follow all the details.

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the prosecution: Prosecutors are trying to leave their final imprint on the jury, but jurors may be so numb that they don’t feel the impact. Deedrick testified he believes the imprints at the crime scene could have come from Goldman’s clothing. Shoe expert Bodziak was even stronger in his opinion, stating that unless a small child participated in the killings the shoe prints were not those of another murderer. Now, if only they could find those Bruno Maglis.

On the defense: Scheck took several swipes at FBI fiber expert Deedrick. Realizing that his specialty is limited to hair and fiber, not blood spatter, Scheck attacked Deedrick as not as qualified as Lee. Deedrick remained calm but had to concede that the parallel imprints could have come from shoes. That would be great news for the defense, but Deedrick also added that the shoes would have to have soles exactly like Levi’s jeans. What are the odds?

PAUL ROTHSTEIN

On the prosecution: Photos accompanying expert testimony showed what seemed impossible: Goldman’s clothes could produce imprints Lee said may be the unknown assailant’s shoe prints. Prosecutors are closing strong--stressing physical evidence like the gloves, DNA evidence placing Ron Goldman’s blood in the Bronco and eschewing character assassination of O.J., letting even jurors who might convict keep a warm spot in their hearts for the remembered hero O.J.

On the defense: Defense attacks on Deedrick’s qualifications, competency and motivation were beside the point. Enlarged photos made the point for Deedrick. But the most the photos and testimony established was that the origin of the imprints is now in dispute and if the jury has doubts as to whether another assailant was there, this could translate into a reasonable doubt.

Compiled by Henry Weinstein, Los Angeles Times