Only hours before, in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Cochran was certain the tapes would cast irreparable suspicion over the state’s case. “This is bigger than his courtroom,” he said. Indeed, Fuhrman’s repeated racial epithets, along with his boastful descriptions of tortured suspects, fabricated evidence and sadistic cops, shook Los Angeles and other cities already reeling from incidents of serious police misconduct. The tapes once again underscored how different black and white perceptions can be. The latest poll conducted by NEWSWEEK found that 48 percent of nonwhites believe Fuhrman-like police behavior is common in their community, but only 15 percent of whites thought so. “Whites are shocked,” says Councilman Michael Nutter of Philadelphia, who is black. “Minorities say. ‘Yeah? You guys are just finding this out?’”

Ito’s edict was a godsend for the prosecution, steering the focus away from a renegade racist and back to the defendant. Prosecutors have presented six months of testimony establishing what they like to call “a mountain of evidence” linking Simpson to the murders of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. But the entire Fuhrman episode threatened to deflect attention from that evidence–which was, of course, the defense’s idea. The legal strategy was to totally discredit Fuhrman: months ago he testified he had not used the N word in the previous 10 years. Now the hate-filled tapes proved otherwise. If the black-majority jury found that out, maybe they’d conclude he lied about everything. Could Fuhrman be pathological enough to plant the damning bloody glove? Ito said the tapes didn’t directly address the question. “It’s a theory without factual support,” he wrote. So he excluded the tapes as evidence, and the jury won’t hear them. The defeat for the defense was “devastating,” says UCLA law professor Peter Arenella, “because what the jury needed to hear . . . was that [Fuhrman] was willing to fabricate evidence against innocent African-Americans, and he trusted other officers to cover for him.”

It’s no wonder the defense wanted to introduce as many tapes as possible. Made by wanna-be screenwriter Laura Hart McKinny (box), they reveal a police officer obsessed with racial hatred. Fuhrman’s words, like “buck nigger” and “niggers run like rabbits,” scrolled up a courtroom screen last week, as his calm voice hammered through the silence. The now retired detective bragged about turning suspects’ faces into “mush” and lying for fellow officers. He was an equal-opportunity bigot: slurs against Mexicans, blacks, women and elected officials filled his monologue. Fuhrman derided the LAPD’s use-of-force policy: “The department says we shoot to stop, not kill, which is bulls–t. The only way you can stop somebody is to kill the son of a bitch.” Instead of all those fulminations the jury will hear only two of 41 racial epithets, both showing he did use the N word.

This week the defense plans to ask Ito to reconsider his ruling. He’s not likely to. So the lawyers will try to call witnesses to testify about Fuhrman’s alleged abusive conduct. That would get the Fuhrman side-show before the jury anyway–without having to play the tapes. But Ito might not allow all of these witnesses, for just that reason; if Fuhrman’s own words are irrelevant, then so, too, might be others’ account of them. The defense also plans an aggressive attack on the integrity of the prosecution team itself. Cochran told NEWSWEEK he believed the D.A.’s office knew before Fuhrman took the stand in March that he was a racist cop. Fuhrman had, after all, conceded in a secret practice session first reported in NEWSWEEK last March that he had used racial epithets in the past. “If I can show that,” then the whole ease should be thrown out, Cochran said. The reasoning: prosecutors had an ethical duty to speak up if they believed Fuhrman was lying. The prosecution dismisses the defense attack as “desperate.” “We are scrupulous about notifying the court of any issues that arise.” says Bill Hodgman, a senior D.A.

Fuhrman isn’t likely to provide any more fodder for the defense. The prosecution won’t recall him to the stand, and if the defense does he’s likely to plead the Fifth Amendment. While the D.A.’s office has signaled it’s unlikely to charge Fuhrman with perjury, he could face other criminal and civil charges stemming from his taped indiscretions. The U.S. Justice Department says it may start a civil-rights investigation of him, which could lead to a prosecution. And any suspects, defendants or convicts he mistreated may consider lawsuits.

While the judge’s opinion may have put the thai back on track and the beleaguered jury may get the case by mid-September, Ito could do nothing to stop the public fallout from the tapes. Los Angeles has yet to recover fully from the 1992 riots sparked by the Rodney King beating trial. Fuhrman opens the wounds. “I’m telling you, if O.J. gets convicted, brothers are going to be out looking for matches again,” says Lavon Howard, a 31-year-old black Los Angeles resident from Fox Hills. “I am not saying that’s right, but it seems to be the only thing that works around here.” Fuhrman may not make the prosecution’s case go “bye-bye,” as he once boasted to McKinny last year. But his words from the tapes have already taken their toll on the city he once swore to protect.