.........but that doesn't excuse the fact that the Prosecutors did a piss-poor job proving their case. I believe to my very core that OJ was guilty, but also that the jury got the verdict RIGHT. The Prosecutor didn't prove her case. And it's her own damn fault. Procedural/tactical mistake after mistake.
I heard in a seminar years ago that the Prosecutor's office tried this case to a mock jury 3 different times and lost all 3 times. And the main reason why (among many reasons) was that the juries ALL said they didn't believe her timeline. Yet she went into the trial and insisted on going forward with that exact same timeline. Making him try on the gloves was another huge mistake. The jury didn't need to see him try on those gloves. It was unnecessary, and it backfired.
The other big blunders she made were allowing him to change the venue of the trial to get a more favorable jury, and NOT asking for the death penalty. The reason for asking for the death penalty is tactical. He was a major celebrity. There's no way in hell that any jury would ever sentence him to death. But once you ask for the death penalty, you are required to seat a "death penalty qualified" jury. That means every juror seated has to state that if convicted, they would be willing to sentence the defendant to death. That gives you a much more prosecution-slanted jury.
That's why I tell people to this day, OJ is guilty, but the jury actually got the verdict right.
= new reply since forum marked as read