“As one of the vanishingly small minority of people who think that OJ was guilty but the OJ jury came up with the correct verdict,”
“How can you say that a person is a killer but the jury says he’s not guilty and you think that’s a correct verdict?”
Having a brother that is a retired lawyer, I can tell you he was stunned at the way Ito let the focus of the crime move from OJ to an issue of race. The evidence to convict Simpson was overwhelming, the most damnable and proof positive of which was the DNA matched fresh blood at the scene of the crime matching the cut on the back of simpson’s fingers.
His blood at her house and Goldman’s blood at OJ’s house.
It was pretty simple.
There is a lot of evidence that was not in the criminal trial but was in the civil trial that absolutely damns him, but what does it matter, the jury was a ship of fools on the River Simpson.