
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, July 25, 1995                   TAG: 9507250083
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL                    PAGE: A-3   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: LOS ANGELES                                LENGTH: Medium

DEFENSE EXPERT'S OPINION SUGGESTS FRAME-UP OF O.J.

O.J. Simpson's lawyers unveiled their strongest frame-up evidence for jurors Monday: a scientist's conclusion that a blood preservative used at the police lab was present in key evidence.

The defense has long contended that traces of the preservative on a bloody sock found in Simpson's bedroom and a metal gate outside his ex-wife's condominium show the blood was planted as part of a conspiracy.

On cross-examination, prosecutor Marcia Clark clashed with the witness, suggesting his conclusions were based on a misreading of government reports. He called her suggestions ``absurd.''

Outside court, Judge Lance Ito released 530 pages of transcripts of interviews with jurors in April when a rebellion rocked the jury. The documents showed jurors stressed by sequestration and distressed by the removal of three deputies who had been guarding them.

The defense witness, forensic toxicologist Fredric Rieders, didn't test the actual evidence but analyzed an FBI agent's reports on tests. Rieders said the tests clearly point to the telltale chemical EDTA in the socks and gate blood.

Prosecution experts have testified that the blood on the gate is consistent with Simpson's and blood on the sock with that of Nicole Brown Simpson, who was slain beside her friend Ronald Goldman outside her condominium.

Focusing on anticipated prosecution arguments, Blasier quickly addressed the theory that the socks could show EDTA because the chemical is in laundry detergent.

Rieders said the FBI had tested portions of the sock that were not bloody, and those sections contained no sign of EDTA. Asked to explain, he said, ``In my opinion, the EDTA came from the blood, not the sock.''

Defense lawyers contend the socks were smeared with Nicole Simpson's autopsy blood sample after the slayings and the gate blood came from a sample Simpson provided the day after the killings.

Erwin Chemerinksy, a University of Southern California law professor, said Rieders' testimony was ``the only direct evidence so far that the police planted evidence, and the only way the defense can explain the blood on the socks is that it was planted.''

by CNB