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 Wyoming criminal defense lawyer Gerry Spence, who will rotate with other experts as the case moves forward. Today’s topic: The testimony of former LAPD Officer Ron Shipp, who said Simpson told him he had dreamed of killing his former wife.

PETER ARENELLA

On the prosecution: “Dreams about killing your wife don’t make you a murderer. But Shipp’s unstated but obvious belief in Simpson’s guilt will help the prosecution if the jury finds him to be a credible witness. Who better than a “friend” of O.J. Simpson to do him in with statements like “I don’t want the blood of Nicole on Ron Shipp’s hands,” elicited during Carl Douglas’ cross-examination?”

On the defense: “Douglas’ goal was to destroy Shipp’s credibility by suggesting he was another “wannabe” trying to promote his acting career by exaggerating the closeness of his relationship with Simpson and fabricating testimony about O.J.’s dreams of killing Nicole. He might have scored some points by showing how little Shipp actually socialized with O.J., and may have generated the impression that Shipp was a frustrated Simpson groupie.”

LAURIE LEVENSON

On the prosecution: “It’s a tricky situation trying to examine a witness like Ron Shipp, but Chris Darden handled it quite well. He did not try to hide Shipp’s background, airing the damaging information for the jury, making both Shipp and the prosecution look more credible. Darden also showed how the police were in awe of O.J.--hardly the image of officers who would try to frame him.”

On the defense: “The defense did more for the prosecution Wednesday than the prosecution could have done for itself. By attacking Shipp so viciously, the defense made it seem like O.J. had told him incredibly incriminating information. If the defense had just left it alone, I doubt that the jury would have convicted O.J. on the basis of an alleged dream. The defense looks like they will attack anyone.”

GERRY SPENCE

On the prosecution: “This was a powerful day for the prosecution. Shipp’s unbelievably powerful statement that he does not have the blood of Nicole Simpson on his hands and he can sleep at night now, unlike a lot of others, was magical. I’ve had a lot of witnesses in my career, but that is how a witness should conduct himself. He had a truthful story to tell and a unique ability to keep control of himself and not fall prey to the cross-examiner’s slings and arrows.”

On the defense: “Carl Douglas’ cross-examination was stinging and aggressive, but he lost. He lost because there is a basic principle in the courtroom that you don’t win by killing or slashing the witness. Douglas’ last question--”You had a drinking problem, didn’t you, sir?”--was as nasty as if he had slapped Shipp across the face. But it didn’t erode Shipp’s credibility in the slightest; it only reduced the stature of the cross-examiner.”