Scientific thinking about the reliability of DNA evidence may be more squarely on the side of the prosecution in the upcoming O.J. Simpson trial than the defense might have anticipated, says a UC Davis law scholar. Within the past few weeks, several leading scientists in the debate over DNA typing -- previously at odds with each other -- have agreed that it is accurate, paving the way for its admission in court, says Edward J. Imwinkelried, who teaches law and studies scientific evidence. Furthermore, the National Research Council, affiliated with the National Academy of Sciences, is convening soon a new conference on such evidence, at which it appears the council may soften its earlier statement attacking the way laboratories compute the probability of a random match in DNA genetic markers. "The prosecution will be able to argue that things have changed since 1992, and that they ought to be able to admit such evidence in 1994," despite the earlier concerns in the scientific community over DNA evidence in court, Imwinkelried says.