[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Kate
T1:
Category 3: Category 1
Date: 07 Aug 1999
Time: 01:12:37
Charlie:
Here is the story you asked for:
Burden of Proof O.J. hearing prelude to court battle ahead By Shirley E. Perlman
Los Angeles - The hearing has ended; the journalists have cleared out of the courthouse, but the O.J. Simpson murder case has only just begun.
After six days of riveting testimony and unrelenting media coverage, the public is left with as many questions as answers and the nagging thought that it may never learn the complete truth about what happened to Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman on that quiet, dimly lit walk on a June night in Brentwood, Calif.
In her ruling Friday, Judge Kathleen Kennedy-Powell said there was ample reason to believe the unthinkable - that O.J. Simpson had butchered his ex-wife and a friend and then concocted an alibi to cover his tracks, and that it may have been premeditated, in which case he could face the death penalty.
At the preliminary hearing, the burden on the prosecution was merely to show there's reason to believe that Simpson is the murderer. At trial, guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and casting doubt is the name of the game for the defense.
Simpson's lawyer, Robert Shapiro, touched on the distinction in his closing argument Friday.
"If the evidence presented relies solely on circumstantial evidence,there can be no conviction unless the circumstances point to guilt and are not reconcilable with any other reasonable theory," he said."
If, on the other hand, the circumstances may point to guilt or may point to innocence, the jury, or finder of fact, must adopt that theory that points to innocence and reject that which points to guilt."
On the face of it, the evidence against Simpson seems overwhelming: the trail of blood that starts at his ex-wife's condo and ends at his doorstep; the blood-stained gloves, one at her house, one at his; the blood on his car and in his house; the cap with hair that seems consistent with his; the cut on his finger; the disputed alibi; and, finally and most important, the blood test results that prosecutors say may link him to the crime.
But then come the questions: Can the hat and gloves be linked to Simpson? Was his finger cut at the crime scene? Could such a small cut produce a trail of blood? The limousine driver and Brian (Kato) Kaelin, the occupant of the guest house, testified that they saw no injuries on Simpson when he left for the airport. And people on the flight to Chicago also said they noticed no injuries.
Then there's the coroner's report, which leaves many fertile areas for an attack by the defense.
Dr. Irwin Golden, on cross-examination by Shapiro on Friday, made the startling admission that the victims' injuries were consistent with two different knives, undermining the prosecution's initial theory that the stiletto collector's knife that Simpson bought a few weeks before the killings may have been the murder weapon.
Golden also testified that both victims had defensive wounds on their hands and arms, wounds that are incurred while trying to fight off an attacker. He noted that Goldman had bruises on his knuckles and hands. At trial the defense can be expected to characterize those bruises as offensive wounds and to raise questions in the minds of jurors about why, given the medical examiner's own account of events, there was no apparent evidence that Simpson was in a fight.
Then there's the time element and a defense theory that Goldman was murdered well after Nicole Simpson, making it difficult to prove Simpson was the killer.
Prosecutor Marcia Clark says Simpson had a 70-minute window of time to commit the murders, drop the glove, drive home in his Bronco and run into the house. Witnesses testified that Nicole Simpson left Mezzaluna restaurant at about 8:30 p.m.; that she called there about her mother's eyeglasses at about 9:35 p.m.; that Goldman clocked out of work at 9:33 p.m., then had something to eat and left the restaurant with the glasses at about 9:50 p.m.; that her dog, Kaito, started barking at about 10:15 p.m. The limo driver said he couldn't get Simpson to answer his buzzer until around 11 p.m., after he saw a black person, 6-feet tall, 200 pounds (like Simpson), run across the driveway into the house.
But a friend of Goldman's - whom Clark did not call to the stand - said on ABC's "Turning Point" that she spoke to Goldman on the phone at his apartment at about 10:17 p.m. She said Goldman, who was still wearing his waiter's uniform when he left Mezzaluna, apparently stopped home to change clothes before going to Nicole Simpson's condo to drop off the glasses.
The coroner's report says Goldman was wearing Levi's and a light-colored shirt when his body was found. In addition, Golden conceded on cross-examination that the food in Goldman's stomach was more digested than Nicole Simpson's, another indication that he may have been killed later.
Finally, there's the problem of Simpson's celebrity and the added burden on prosecutors to offer proof beyond any doubt because of Simpson's tremendous popularity and the reluctance of the public to accept that he could be guilty.
For that reason, defense experts say, DNA evidence will play a crucial role because it appears to be the only evidence capable of linking Simpson to the crime beyond reasonable doubt.
But the experts said it will have to do more than link Simpson to the crime location, which Simpson had visited many times prior to the murders. It will be paramount to establish a transfer of evidence, which means finding the victims' blood in Simpson's car or on other belongings.
Shapiro has already begun to plant seeds of doubt.
"If, in fact, the killer lived in the Simpson residence, the court would have to believe the following: that in the window period of less than an hour, the killer was able to leave the crime scene that has been described with a victim with two arteries in the neck cut, with two jugular veins cut and massive blood from both victims," he said in court Friday.
"A clear inference would be that the murderer would be covered with blood," he continued. "The murderer would then have to do the following: abandon the bloody clothing because they have not been found and presented, abandon the murder weapon, because that has not been found or discovered, abandon bloody shoes because they have not been found or discovered, and then go back to his house and leave a bloody glove. That just doesn't stand up to logic."
* * * * The Wounds The wounds inflicted to Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman during their slayings, according to testimony and diagrams provided by the Los Angeles deputy medical examiner.
Ronald Goldman Fatal wounds: Two deep cuts on left side of his neck that severed his jugular vein and another artery.
Fatal wounds: Two knife plunges to the right side of the chest which perforated the thorax and right lung, and a 5-1/2 inch wound to the left abdomen which performated the abdominal aorta.
Superficial stab wound to right flank (3/8 inches in length)
Stab wound to left thigh (2 1/8 in length)
Stab wounds to face and cuts to back of head
Nicole Brown Fatal wounds: Knife wound to neck severed both carotid arteries, sliced through a jugular vein and nearly severed the other jugular. The gaping wound measured 5 1/2 inches by 2 1/2 inches, angling across the larynx and toward the right ear. It was so deep it penetrated one-quarter inch into one of her vertebrae.
Stab wounds on left side of neck, wounds on back of head and on scalp.
Both victims had "defense wounds, " primarily on their hands in an effort to fight the attack or seize a weapon. SOURCE: Court testimony, Los Angeles Times Copyright 1994, Newsday Inc. Shirley E. Perlman, Burden of Proof O.J. hearing prelude to court battle ahead. , Newsday, 07-10-1994, pp A07.