O.J. Simpson On Trial After Months Of Preliminaries, The Main Event Begins Monday In Judge Ito’s Courtroom

The agony mounted. The searing pain of separation, of love lost forever, built to a level worse than ever before. Worse than when he used to yell at her. Worse than when he used to hit her.

In a jealous rage, prosecutors likely will argue Monday, O.J. Simpson moved up the last notch on the violence scale, from wife beater to wife killer. A young waiter returning a pair of eyeglasses after dark just got in the way.

This scenario is expected to be the core of the prosecutors’ critical opening statement as they try to convince a jury that Simpson committed murder with malice aforethought.

They will say this is a story of sex and bloody violence, of an American idol exposed as a marital tyrant, of crisp science that can uncloak a killer.

The Simpson defense team, by contrast, will submit to the jury that this is a story full of holes, a fabrication reeking of sloppy police work, overzealous prosecution and a man wrongly accused.

But if Simpson did not kill Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman last June 12, who did?

Defense lawyers will know the jurors’ thirst for an answer, but it’s not their job to supply one.

Rather, they will seek to sow doubt. They may acknowledge the mountain of evidence the prosecution appears to have piled up and say, sure, it could have been Simpson. But, they will suggest, it also could have been drug hitmen, who could have been spotted committing a murder, which could have been motivated by a drug deal gone bad.

The fact is, the defense likely will say, it could have been anybody for any reason, and if police and prosecutors had bothered to take their star-struck eyes off Simpson long enough to look for the real killer, maybe jurors would have their answer.

So, starting 10 a.m. Monday in Department 103 of Superior Court, the words will fly. By law, the prosecution goes first; it has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense follows; it need prove nothing.

These first days are crucial, as each side lays out full details of its case for the first time. But the goal is to do more than state what evidence may prove or disprove. The attorneys will make promises and plant ideas, trying to make powerful first impressions and earn trust.

“The presumption by most criminal lawyers is that jurors make up their minds after opening statements, and the trial is there just to confirm or refute their original idea,” said Harland Braun, a longtime criminal defense attorney in Los Angeles.

A recent study by researchers at Columbia University’s Teachers College found that substantial numbers of jurors do, in fact, make up their minds when the preliminary story line rings true, often in opening statements.

The defense statement likely will be delivered by Johnnie Cochran Jr., who’s known to charm juries with his easy folksiness and captivate them with magnificent oratory.

The prosecution has guarded closely just who will deliver its opening statement, but odds are it will be Deputy District Attorney Marcia Clark, whose rhetorical skills are a match for Cochran’s. The district attorney has suggested, however, that more than one prosecutor may address the jury.

Superior Court Judge Lance Ito has imposed no time limit, a court spokeswoman said, and the prosecution’s case, especially, could take a whole court day to unveil, perhaps spilling into Tuesday.

Ito’s courtroom is wired with hightech equipment for evidence presentation, including a big screen appropriate to a sports bar, and lawyers may sprinkle their openings with charts and graphics.

It’s almost certain prosecutors will go out of their way to “dirty up” Simpson, outlining an alleged history of spousal abuse and degradation to show that even a man of his wealth, fame, talent and amiability can be a coldhearted killer.

Graphic: Nicole Brown Simpson’s home