to our story, "burning suspicion." once again, keith morris. >> defense attorney mark geragos had done what he could to poke holes in the prosecution's murder case against paul zumot, arguing that the prosecution had no solid scientific proof or clear evidence zumot was anywhere near jennifer when she was strangled and the house was set on fire. anyway, he asked, if paul attacked jennifer, wouldn't she have put up some kind of fight? why were there no defensive marks or scratches on paul zumot's body? did the prosecution even have a case? paul zumot wasn't going to take any chances. in fact, he was determined to tell the jury his side of the story. so geragos assigned a female colleague to question paul. it must have been a strategy, whispered courtroom observers. a way to show the jury that paul could in fact interact well with a woman.