(5 of 6)
In response, the language was extraordinary, the outrage genuine. ``Disgusting,'' ``appalling,'' ``worse than appalling,'' Clark raged. ``Trial by ambush,'' she charged. Defense lawyer Carl Douglas acknowledged to the court that there were some new witnesses but insisted the mistakes were ``inadvertent'' and pointed out that the prosecution had also been late with some witness names during the hearing on Simpson's past abusive behavior.
Many legal experts believe the defense performed beautifully, but is being a bit disingenuous. ``There's no other way to interpret this except as a deliberate withholding of the witnesses,'' says Erwin Chemerinsky, a law professor at the University of Southern California. ``I understand why the prosecution was outraged.'' And at the very least, the defense must enjoy seeing the prosecution so rattled at such a crucial point in the trial. ``For Bill Hodgman to object 13 times is a sign of how bad the damage to the prosecution was,'' says Los Angeles criminal-defense lawyer Andrew Stein. ``Marcia Clark and Bill Hodgmanwere right to be indignant.''
Even as the lawyers wait for Ito to rule this week on the prosecution's 27 motions for sanctions--which could include an admonition to the jury to disregard some of Cochran's statements because the defense did not comply with California's discovery laws--Clark has already absorbed the new blows. Darden argued to the judge that some of Cochran's witnesses were not likely to hold up under cross-examination. He called them a collection of ``heroin addicts, thieves, felons,'' adding that one is ``a court-certified pathological liar,'' and the prosecution's research may bear this out. Rosa Lopez, for instance, who worked at the house next door to Simpson's, claims to have seen Simpson's Bronco parked outside his house at the time the murders must have occurred. But Lopez is considered so confused and unreliable that even the staff at the National Enquirer rejected her as a source months ago. (For example, she told Enquirer reporters that Jason Simpson had had a birthday party at his father's house the night before the murders, which is not true.) And according to the Los Angeles Times, Gerchas, a jewelry-store owner, has been sued at least 34 times in recent years for complaints including allegations of fraud and failure to pay creditors.
Clark insists that her efforts to shred the defense's arguments do not mean she harbors any hatred for Simpson. ``I care about fairness and justice for a defendant, but I really don't focus on a defendant,'' she told Time. ``I focus on victims. It's not personal with me. I view it that this person has done something bad. They may not be a bad person. I can even accept their good side.''
For those merely watching on the sidelines, the adversarial nature of courtroom proceedings does tempt an observer to keep score. Advantage prosecution, the pundits declared following Day One. TOUCHDOWN, JOHNNIE! blared the tabloid New York Post after Cochran took the floor. ``After the prosecution finished, it seemed so clear that O.J. was guilty,'' says U.S.C.'s Chemerinsky. ``Then after the defense finished, you felt he was not guilty. What more could you ask for?'' The jury, however, has yet to see the full presentation of evidence--and evidence, in theory, is what will take the day.
--Reported by Elaine Lafferty and James Willwerth/Los Angeles