And Neufeld seized every opportunity to undercut Weir's testimony. It was a familiar defense strategy: Over the last few months, Simpson's lawyers have portrayed Los Angeles Police Department detectives, an LAPD criminalist and a Los Angeles County deputy coroner as bumbling, unreliable and even incompetent.
Again and again, the attacks put prosecutors on the defensive. On Monday too, Clarke had to spend much of his time trying to explain away mistakes and resurrect his own witness.
Explaining that he was not being paid to perform calculations for the prosecution, Weir said he had agreed to testify because "I've been very angry about some of the statements about DNA statistics that have been made in court [over the past few years.] I'm very anxious that the [analysis] be done correctly." A statistics professor at the University of North Carolina, Weir said that while he was testifying in Los Angeles, he was officially "on vacation."
Preparing New Figures
Weir churned out 300 pages of numbers over the weekend as he revised his erroneous calculations. Court was delayed for more than an hour Monday morning as defense attorneys pored over the new math.
When the jurors filed in at 10:15 a.m., Neufeld fiercely attacked the validity of the population samples used to determine how many people share certain genetic markers.
Weir acknowledged that the most accurate way to figure out the frequency of genetic patterns would be "to go out and type everybody in the world." But he said such precision was impractical: "We can't count everyone in the world, much less type them."
Neufeld suggested that at the very least, databases should include people from the "population of potential perpetrators." In this case, Weir acknowledged, that population would include residents of Los Angeles County.
Instead, the database included several hundred FBI agents and blood donors from Detroit, Miami and Houston.
"Do you consider 220 white FBI agents to be in the population of potential perpetrators for the murders of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson?" Neufeld asked, with heavy sarcasm in his voice.
Weir responded: "Oh, yes . . . it's a lovely collection."
In seeming disbelief, Neufeld noted that the population samples contained no Asian Americans.
But Weir insisted that for geneticists, the concept of race is meaningless. "We may look different," he said, "but underneath, we're all the same."
Jurors, looking bemused, listened with interest as he added: "The whole idea of race is very vague. . . . People can call themselves Martians, and we'll still get the same results: that the profiles [found in crime scene blood] are rare."
Nonetheless, Weir did acknowledge that a given genetic marker might show up more frequently among a certain racial group.
The most likely source of a mingled blood spot on the Bronco's steering wheel, he said, was a trio of two African Americans and one Caucasian. He pegged the chance of that combination leaving the stain at one in two. In contrast, the probability that three Caucasians were responsible for the blood smear was just one in 3,500, Weir said.
Groping for a common-sense metaphor to explain the tangle of statistics, Weir compared the analysis of DNA frequencies to a slot machine.
Imagine, he told jurors, a stain consisting of three types of blood. To hit the jackpot, the "slot machine" of DNA analysis must come up with a lemon on one wheel, a cherry on another and an orange on the third, he said.
Weir said his statistics calculated the frequency of hitting the jackpot--of three people possessing the right genetic markers to match the mingled elements in the drop of blood. Neufeld's much lower odds, he said, reflect the chance of either a lemon or a cherry or an orange popping up on the slot machine--not of all three flashing simultaneously.
Thus, when Neufeld announced to the jury on Monday that half of humanity could have left the stain on the Bronco's console, Weir dismissed that statistic as "absurd." His own calculations showed that only one in 570 people could be responsible for the blood smear. And O.J. Simpson could not be excluded as a possible source.
"I wouldn't even dignify [Neufeld's] number by putting it on the same paper" as his own figures, Weir said. "I'm not \o7 saying \f7 it's wrong, it just \o7 is \f7 wrong."
Trace Evidence Presented
When Weir finally stepped off the stand, the prosecution embarked on the next phase of their case: a discussion of hairs, fibers and other trace evidence.
LAPD crime lab technician Denise Lewis described, in detail, how she changed her latex gloves before handling every piece of evidence, from soil to fingernail clippings to a moldy, bloody shirt.
After establishing the chain of custody for those items, prosecutors plan to call two other witnesses to discuss the evidence. Outside court, Deputy Dist. Atty. Christopher Darden said the prosecution hopes to wrap up its case by Friday.
When court adjourned at 5 p.m., Superior Court Judge Lance A. Ito asked two jurors to hand over books they had been reading so he could check them for "problem" material. One of the books reportedly was a John Grisham novel.