(2 of 3)
It was that glove that defense lawyer Shapiro wanted ruled out of bounds. Shapiro argued that it had been collected during a search without a warrant. According to the exclusionary rule, which enforces the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unlawful searches and seizures, illegally procured evidence cannot be admitted at trial, however vital it may be to proving guilt. Thus for two days, the hearing turned itself inside out as investigating detectives found themselves having to explain their own actions rather than Simpson's.
The prosecution took refuge in one of the exclusionary rule's exceptions: such evidence is admissible if the searchers can show that they stumbled upon it while responding to a perceived emergency. Homicide detective Mark Fuhrman maintained that he and three colleagues had driven from the murder scene to O.J.'s home not to investigate but simply to inform him of Nicole's death and arrange for their children's care. The detectives, puzzled to see lights on in the mansion at that hour (5:10 a.m.), received no answer through the intercom at the gate. When Fuhrman discovered what he thought was a spot of blood on the haphazardly parked Bronco nearby, he vaulted a 5-ft. fence onto the property -- intent, he said, on foiling the Bronco's driver in the event that he might be stalking Simpson or his guests.
Midway through this he encountered Kaelin, heard his tale of bumps in the night, rushed to the service path and discovered the glove. "My heart started pounding," Fuhrman told the court. "I realized what I had finally found" -- presumably the possible key to a double murder. The officer stressed that it was not something he had been looking for: "I was kind of taken aback by the whole event," he said. "We didn't go up there for this."
Judge Kennedy-Powell believed him. Explaining that she could find "no holes" in the detectives' claims, she declared the Fourth Amendment "alive and well" and untainted. She accepted the glove as evidence. In the spectator section, Nicole Simpson's father wept with relief.
Although no one admitted it at the time, the hearing was decided at that % moment. The defense's main strategy was dashed. The prosecution had tipped at least part of its hand, and the judge had tipped hers. After such a rousing affirmation of the police and their judgment, it was unlikely that she would consign their case to legal limbo. From then on, Clark's presentation of her witnesses seemed less like that of a prosecutor fighting for her case than of a victorious poker player laying down a royal flush, card by card.
On the final day of the hearing, Clark displayed her most critical card when a forensic expert declared that Simpson's blood type resembled that of the stains that marked the murderer's departure from the crime. The match was remarkably close: only 0.43% of the population shares the same chemistry. Before this court, however, Clark could not, or would not, link O.J. definitively to the carnage. Detectives admitted that they could find no footprints at his estate to match the bloody ones leading from the murder. Nor could a slit be found on the much prized glove to correspond with a cut on Simpson's finger. On Friday, Simpson cried as a coroner reviewed diagrams of the victims' dozens of wounds; but the descriptions posed a new puzzle: Could a lone assailant have done all that damage that swiftly?