i got him. >>> defense attorney mark geragos had done what he could to poke holes ine. 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. it must have been a strategy, whispered courtroom observers. the way to show the jury that paul could, in fact, interact well with a woman. but those observers were mistaken, said geragos. >> well, i generally -- i don't think direct examination is my strong suit and i was concentrating on cross-examination of the so paul zumot looked the jurors in the eyes and told them, i did not kill jennifer schipsi, did not burn the house. then he told them how despite their roller coaster relationship, he truly loved jennifer. his love letter presented a letter she had written him and he broke down then, a flood of tears. >> i was so relieved