THE O.J. SIMPSON MURDER TRIAL

UCLA law professor Peter Arenella and Loyola University law professor Laurie Levenson offer their take on the Simpson trial. Joining them is defense attorney Jill Lansing, who will rotate with other experts as the case moves forward. Today’s topic: further Fuhrman.

PETER ARENELLA

On the prosecution: “Marcia Clark used Detective Mark Fuhrman’s calm and methodical testimony to make several points to the jury. Fuhrman had no opportunity to find a second glove at the crime scene because he never was alone. He had no place to hide a glove because he had removed his jacket before leaving for Rockingham. Finally, she sent the jury home with the inference that the shovel might have been used to bury the murder weapon and any bloody clothing.”

On the defense: “F. Lee Bailey is sure to pounce on Fuhrman’s testimony that he suspected Simpson’s Bronco had come from the Bundy crime scene because of the blood spot on the door and the shovel inside. Fuhrman’s implied admission that he suspected O.J. before he jumped the wall is inconsistent with the story he told at the preliminary hearing. Bailey can point out that Fuhrman’s admission supports the defense theme that the police rushed to judgment.”

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the prosecution: “Fuhrman continues to do very well on the witness stand. He seems to have done exactly what one would expect a conscientious detective to have done--keep his eyes open, take notes and consider what the evidence might show. While many people thought Fuhrman would be a distraction to the prosecution’s case, he has instead refocused the jury on the evidence. The most remarkable thing about Fuhrman so far is that he is unremarkable.”

On the defense: “The defense seems to be lying in wait. Inside the courtroom, Bailey does not object, while outside he hints that the defense has surprise witnesses to use against Fuhrman. It will be interesting to see if the defense can do more than undermine Fuhrman’s character. Now they also need to explain why a millionaire actor was carrying around a shovel and a plastic bag big enough to hide clothes. There’s more than a bloody glove to this case.”

JILL LANSING

On the prosecution: “Clark put on a very straightforward case, explaining each step of the way why Fuhrman had neither reason nor opportunity to plant evidence. She was assisted by the lack of interruptions, which objections usually cause, and ended the testimony with the introduction of the shovel and body-sized plastic bag, two chilling bits of evidence. Fuhrman’s demeanor was that of a professional police officer merely doing his job.”

On the defense: “The defense clearly has made a tactical decision not to object, even in situations where it would have been appropriate. One wonders if they are so convinced that they can impeach Fuhrman’s credibility to the degree that it doesn’t matter what he says. Bailey did not appear to be taking any notes, which suggests that his cross-examination will not focus on his actions as an investigator. If this in fact is their strategy, it’s a high-risk one.”

Compiled by TIM RUTTEN / Los Angeles Times