Speak for yourself, Pal. I even think it's obscene that OJ could be tried "civilly." A jury (such as it was) heard the case and declared him "not guilty." I know lawyers love infinite trials on the same facts, but it's a bad thing for the rest of us.
ML/NJ
OJ was found not guilty based on the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
That doesn’t mean the jury found him innocent. There is a big freaking difference. As a defense attorney I highlight this all the time.
There is nothing wrong with pursuing him under the lesser standard of proof beyond a preponderance of the evidence.
Plus it doesn’t put the Constitution in play by doing this.