[SkyPilot]

From Wikipedia:

Some judges disliked Ito's handling of the Simpson case because they felt he allowed his courtroom to be turned into part of the media circus to the point where Ito would invite attorneys and courtroom staff into his chambers to watch the previous night's Jay Leno footage; however, Ito and others present in the courtroom[who?] dispute this characterization, challenging critics to identify a proceeding that was not under control. Because the jury was sequestered, an attorney gag order would not have been supported by any appellate court, leading to often chaotic scenes outside the courthouse. Ito allowed a jury field trip through O.J. Simpson's home after it had been stage dressed by the defense team, in one case replacing an artistic nude painting of Simpson's girlfriend with a reproduction of Norman Rockwell's painting of Ruby Bridges being escorted to school in the Little Rock desegregation struggle. Ito was also criticized for the way that the jury was handled, bowing to defense team pressure to dismiss juror Francine Florio-Bunten late in the trial. Outrage by Vincent Bugliosi illustrates a broad range of judicial incompetence attributed to Ito. For his part Judge Ito notes that his demeanor in his trials was a result of the Japanese way of shikata ga nai, or "it can't be helped".

[djf]

That case was lost - by the prosecution.

There is no way anybody could say that that particular jury represented the type of neighborhood that the crime was committed in.

And as far as evidence went, I can certainly understand, given the fact that he routinely beat the hell out of her, that her blood was in his car - but Goldmans? No way, no chance, that puts OJ at the scene. That seals the deal.

And Cochranes “If it doesn’t fit...”
Hey, you could go to any decent theatre group and pick five people out. Take them to Sears and buy perfectly fitting gloves. Then have them act like the glove doesn’t fit. Or take the gloves and soak them in water. Or ...

The prosecution lost that case.