A mountain of evidence... and you ignore it all.
What evidence? The things you referenced from the trial (gloves, shoes, etc) were contradicted by quotes from the witness testimony. If the prosecution had a "mountain of evidence", they did a horrendous job of making their case.
O.J. was not 'proven innocent'; rather, it was that he was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Nothing is stopping you from thinking O.J. committed the murders; as woodpusher himself said further up-thread, "OJ might be guilty, but the prosecution proved almost nothing at the trial."
If you're so upset with the results of that case that you're dismissing woodpusher as a "sucker", a "fool", and "dumber than a box of rocks" for merely quoting and referencing testimony and events from the actual trial, then maybe you should spend your energy complaining about the LAPD's crappy procedures that caused their evidence to be less than worthless for the prosecution.
We don’t live in a perfect world. No police department in the world has perfect procedures. No evidence in the world exists in which anomalies couldn’t be found if you didn’t look hard enough. It’s the job of the intelligent, fair juror to weight the evidence as a reasonable person... not as a race pimp looking for any excuse in the book to acquit the man. A mostly white jury in L.A. would have looked at the same evidence and locked O.J. up for life and thrown away the key... or put him on death row. But with the best money could buy, the so-called “Dream Team” played the race card from the bottom of the deck, as Robert Shapiro latter admitted. And it worked, giving the blacks on the jury the excuse to let a guilty-as-hell man walk free. If Bruno Magli shoe fits, wear it. If you would have acquitted a double-murdering monster because you fell for the distortions of the “Dream Team,” and are a guilty man’s dream juror: a sucker and a chump.