murder of his girlfriend and was determined to take the stand with the hopes of convincing the jury he was innocent. but, would this risky move pay off? here is keith morrison with the conclusion of "burning suspicion." defense attorney mark geragos had done what he could to poke holes in the prosecution's murder case against paul zumot, arguing the prosecution had no scientific proof or clear evidence zumot was anywhere near jennifer when she was strangled and when the house was set on fire. anyway, he asked, if paul attacked jennifer, wouldn't she have put up some kind of a 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 gerados assigned a female colleague to question paul.