Simpson Trial Witness Tells of Finding Bodies

On a day devoted largely to barking dogs and minute-by-minute recollections, the jury in the trial of O.J. Simpson heard Wednesday from the man who came upon the bloody scene where Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman lay murdered.

A loose and wailing dog, identified later as Nicole Simpson’s Akita, dragged Sukru Boztepe to the Brentwood murder site on June 13 shortly after midnight, Boztepe testified. As they reached the end of the tile walkway leading to Nicole Simpson’s door, the dog looked toward the residence, and Boztepe said he followed the animal’s gaze.

“Can you tell us what you saw?” Deputy Dist. Atty. Marcia Clark asked.

“I saw a lady laying down full of blood,” Boztepe answered, in testimony that closely mirrored his account during last summer’s preliminary hearing.

Shown a photograph of the crime scene in which Nicole Simpson can be seen slumped at the bottom of a short flight of stairs, her body surrounded by blood, Boztepe said it depicted what he saw that night.

Superior Court Judge Lance A. Ito warned photographers not to record the crime scene photograph. Jurors, who have remained steadfastly impassive throughout the trial, showed little reaction when the picture was displayed.

Boztepe’s testimony came on a day of far-flung developments in the Simpson case. Among them:

* A woman cited in Simpson attorney Johnnie L. Cochran Jr.’s opening statement as someone who could offer evidence clearing Simpson turned herself in to face possible charges of felony fraud. Mary Anne Gerchas, who has been sued dozens of times in recent years, surrendered at the Los Angeles Police Department’s West Los Angeles station, where she was booked and released on a $20,000 bond in connection with allegations that she defrauded a hotel chain.

* Sources confirmed that a juror who was excused Tuesday had squabbled with at least one other panelist, but reiterated that the juror was removed because she visits a doctor who also treated Simpson and may testify for the defense, not because of any disagreements with her colleagues. Although sources said there appear to be some racial tensions within the jury, they said the juror was not taken off the panel for that reason.

Responding to reports suggesting that the panelist was removed because of the dispute, Ito said through a spokeswoman: “They can report whatever they want, but she was excused because of the reason that was given.” Wednesday night the juror’s husband told The Times that his wife was upset by reports that she had clashed with fellow panelists. “It’s not true,” he said. “I don’t know how it got started. The reason she was replaced was the doctor.”

* The lawyer for Simpson friend Al (A.C.) Cowlings said his client has withdrawn from a possible book deal after Cowlings’ co-author wrote a proposal that included derogatory remarks about Nicole Simpson. “A.C. has reconsidered whether he wants to do the book and has come to the conclusion he does not want to do the book,” said Donald M. Re, Cowlings’ attorney.

* After a juror from another case sent Ito a note complaining that witnesses could watch the Simpson proceedings on a television monitor in the courthouse hallway, Ito voiced some concern. He has asked that witnesses not follow the proceedings. But he dropped the television issue after he was assured that the monitor, which is used by a still photographer to take pictures of the proceedings, is shielded from witnesses.

* Ito refused to dismiss a subpoena for Simpson’s first wife, Marquerite Simpson Thomas. That could force her to testify, but she has refused to meet with prosecutors, so they would be forced to call her without knowing what she would say, an extremely risky approach that most trial lawyers avoid if possible.

While assorted developments outside court continued to crop up in the Simpson case, the day’s testimony centered almost entirely on the effort to nail down the time of the murders. That is a crucial element of the prosecution case, as the prosecution needs to establish that Simpson would have had time to commit the murders and still return to his home two miles away to meet a limousine just before 11 p.m.

Simpson has pleaded not guilty to the murders, and his lawyers have said he was at home, chipping golf balls and possibly napping when the crimes were committed. Attempting to debunk the prosecution’s theory of the time of death, defense lawyers have suggested that the killings actually occurred closer to 11 p.m., but they have been confronted over the past two days with a number of witnesses who have testified about seeing or hearing a dog howling in the neighborhood earlier in the night.

On Wednesday, Eva Stein, who lived next door to Nicole Simpson, said she had gone to bed shortly before 10 p.m. on that cool Sunday evening but was awakened about 10:15 p.m. by “very, very persistent, nonstop and very, very loud” barking from one or more dogs.

Stein said she did not look at a clock but said she later fixed the time at about 10:15 p.m. because her boyfriend returned home about half an hour later, and she still was struggling to get back to sleep in the face of the continued barking.

“I couldn’t go back to sleep because it just was very unusually loud,” Stein said. “It wasn’t just like a regular bark. It just seemed like an insistent, loud bark, and it just didn’t stop. And I remember being very annoyed because I couldn’t fall back to sleep.”

Following her to the stand, her boyfriend, Louis Karpf, generally supported Stein’s version of the time, but said he could have arrived a few minutes later than 10:45. Under cross-examination from Cochran, he acknowledged that he had told police he arrived home between 10:50 and 11 p.m.

But he said he now believes it was closer to 10:50.

The wrangling over such small details caused the proceedings to move slowly but reflected the enormous importance both sides place on determining the time of death--a dispute that has raged since the earliest days of the Simpson investigation. If the time of death was much past 10:30 p.m., it would begin to raise questions about whether Simpson could have carried out the crimes.

What seems clear, however, is that the two victims almost certainly were dead by 10:55 p.m. That is when Steven Schwab, another neighbor, found Nicole Simpson’s dog wandering the area with blood on its paws.

Schwab’s recollection of the time--pegged to his meticulous television viewing habits--made him a minor celebrity during last summer’s preliminary hearing, and he testified again Wednesday, repeating his earlier account almost verbatim.

Schwab gave different times when initially interviewed by police--at one point he estimated that he found the dog, whose name is Kato, about 11:15 p.m.--but he explained those discrepancies during the preliminary hearing and again Wednesday by saying that he was sleepy and confused during the initial interview, which took place about 5 a.m. the day after the murders.

That characterization was supported by Boztepe, a friend of Schwab who was present when Schwab was interviewed. Trying to bolster the credibility of Schwab’s initial account to police, Cochran asked Boztepe if Schwab appeared normal during that interview.

The answer appeared to justify any possible discrepancies. “As normal as you can be at 5 o’clock in the morning,” Boztepe responded.

Boztepe was not there when Schwab returned to their apartment complex with Nicole Simpson’s dog, but he said he arrived home about 11:40 p.m. and decided to let the animal spend the night in his apartment. The dog was agitated, however, sniffing and scratching at the door, so Boztepe said he and his wife decided to take him for a walk and hope that he would lead them back to his owner.

During the walk, the dog strained at his leash and eventually led the couple to the bodies.

Although jurors showed no reaction to that testimony, a witness later in the day appeared to charm some members of the panel.

The witness, an elderly woman who has lived for 51 years in the Brentwood neighborhood where the crimes occurred, was called primarily to explain why she had reported a prowler in the neighborhood about midnight. Defense attorneys have seized on that call as evidence that someone other than Simpson might have been spotted, but prosecutors instead wanted to show that the witness, Elsie Tistaert, mistook Boztepe and his wife for prowlers when they came to her door and rang the bell after discovering the bodies across the street.

Tistaert told the jury that she had seen a dog pacing back and forth in front of Nicole Simpson’s house earlier in the evening and had tried to report it but found the police uninterested. Under soft questioning by Clark, Tistaert also said her belief that a prowler was in the area was based on her doorbell being rung about midnight, not on having seen someone lurking near the murder scene.

When it came time for Cochran to cross-examine Tistaert, he too approached her gingerly, asking a few gentle questions. At one point, she paused to adjust her hearing aid, and Cochran asked: “Are you tuning me out?”

Tistaert laughed heartily, and then Ito added: “Where can I get one of those?”

For the first time since they took their oaths, many of the 21 remaining jurors and alternates erupted in laughter.

The size and composition of the jury panel has shifted throughout the trial; three panelists so far have been dismissed. That has not ended the potential changes, either, as at least one more juror is under scrutiny for allegedly possessing inappropriate printed material, such as maps. Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies are investigating that allegation, which could result in dismissal.

At a press conference Wednesday, Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti said he expected some of the current jurors to be replaced before the trial is over. He did not comment on any allegations of juror misconduct.

Testimony resumes in the Simpson trial this morning as prosecutors again shift focus, moving from neighbors of Nicole Simpson to police officers called to investigate the crimes. Their testimony launches the most sensitive phase of the case, as defense attorneys have signaled their intent to challenge aggressively the handling of the investigation.

Specifically, Simpson’s lawyers have alleged that evidence was mishandled and that police focused so single-mindedly on pursuing Simpson that they overlooked other viable suspects.

In support of that theory, defense attorneys have cited the potentially helpful testimony of Gerchas, who Cochran said was prepared to testify that she saw four men, none of them Simpson, near the scene of the crime on the night of the killings. But Gerchas’ credibility has come under question since the day Cochran first mentioned her in court.

Prosecutors derided her record of civil suits, and a review of court files by The Times found that she had been sued 34 times in recent years. In court, Clark referred to her as a “known liar and Simpson case groupie.”

Wednesday, she turned herself in to police officers in West Los Angeles, where she was booked and released after posting a $20,000 bond.

The Los Angeles County district attorney’s office said that Gerchas made fraudulent use of a credit card to bilk the J. W. Marriott Hotel in Century City out of her bill for a three-month stay that began last June.

The prosecutors declined to provide further specifics about the charges, saying that additional details would be revealed when Gerchas is arraigned this morning in West Los Angeles Municipal Court.

Gerchas’ attorney could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.

Times staff writers Eric Malnic and Henry Weinstein contributed to this article.

* RELATED STORIES: A22