Excellent point, and by far the biggest opposition to my argument. Rereading the story, though, you must admit that the family's attorney seems rather inept, combative, and desperate to play the race card. A more rational lawyer would have at least given the jury a few reasons to deliberate for more than 55 minutes.
Also, the OJ jury found him innocent, but that doesn't mean the he didn't do it. ;^) While it is a stretch, as his actions certainly don't inspire confidence, the family's lawyer just might be right about the jury being prejudiced (in the legal sense, not the perjorative).