Poised and chatty, scientist Renee Montgomery was a formidable expert witness against O.J. Simpson during her debut on the stand.
It's not personal, she said. It's science.That was her calm reply when a defense lawyer accused her of interpreting DNA blood tests to help the prosecution. She said her job was "to reflect what the evidence is. Doesn't matter if it helps the prosecution or the defense. We're just reporting the science."
Montgomery explained that yet another type of DNA test shows Simpson's genetic code in blood collected near the mutilated bodies of his ex-wife and her friend.
She said she was assigned to the case because of her experience with D1S80 tests - she has worked on more than 20 cases using the method. The process was largely developed by the FBI and is coming into widespread use.
She described D1S80 testing as "a marriage" of PCR and RFLP, two other DNA tests previously explained in dizzying detail by her colleague Gary Sims and private laboratory scientist Robin Cotton.
Montgomery also testified that blood collected from Simpson's Bronco and from a glove found on his property after the June 12 murders contained the DNA of Nicole Brown Simpson, Ronald Goldman and Simpson himself.
She was to return to the stand Wednesday for more cross-examination.
Montgomery was more assertive and more talkative than Sims, whom she followed to the stand. But her testimony was still highly technical and, at times, just plain dull.
"Oh, yes," said University of Southern California law professor Erwin Chemerinsky. "A point isn't worth making unless the jury understands it, and I think there were parts Wednesday they didn't understand."
Perhaps one of those parts was this exchange between Montgomery and defense attorney Robert Blasier:
Blasier: "Now, with respect to the RFLP half of it, does it have some of the limitations that RFLP has with respect to the size of a sample that you need?"
Montgomery: "No, it doesn't. And I guess I need to clarify how I meant by incorporating both RFLP and PCR. By incorporating the RFLP, you know, by the marriage of it, it's the - we're looking at this as repetitive sequences and so just to clarify that issue, that's how it's similar to the RFLP process. And as far as your question, you - I'm sorry, could you restate your question?"
Some jurors appeared on the verge of dozing. At other times, despite attempts to appear expressionless, they looked down-right confused.
Blasier again pushed the defense theory that blood samples were so badly contaminated they compromised DNA testing. He also raised the prospect of "examiner bias" - a phenomena, Blasier said, in which a scientist obtains the test result that corresponds to his or her expectation.
Montgomery said she had never heard of such a thing.
There was a moment of levity when Blasier, questioning Montgomery on the dividing of DNA samples, slipped and said: "So when you start chopping up the D.A. . . ." Prosecutors Christopher Darden and Marcia Clark joined in the laughter.