Why are we still debating about OJ Simpson's guilt?!?

On October 3, 1995, Simpson was found not guilty of two murders. On February 4, 1997, a civil jury in Santa Monica, California found Simpson liable for their wrongful death. Is he guilty or innocent? Who knows?
What I do know is that our courts have made a decision and it has been upheld for at least 9 years. I can sense the racial disharmony from many of you reading this. If you're anti-OJ, well prove his guilt via the judicial system; quit wasting our time in the court of public opinion. If you are pro-OJ, quit the jubilation; 3 families have been ruined. We have many unsolved murders in American history; the death of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Simpson are among them. So are the deaths of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, JonBenet Ramsey, Marilyn Sheppard, the Black Dahlia, Pre & Post Civil War lynchings, so-called "outside agitators" during the Civil Rights movement, and most importantly the TRUTH.
So please educate me; tell me again why are we still debating about OJ?

Thank you AuntB and James W for the you insightful remarks.

I'm not....your innocent until proven guilty and since I can't prove his guilt, theres nothing that I can do about it. He should of won both courts cause they did not prove upon a reasonable doubt. I usually don't say this, but in this case I will. The race of the 2nd jury played a big role in the civil case. What did they prove in in the 2nd case, that they didn't prove in the 1st? Your answer NOTHING!!!

Hey Joy, get a life. You are too pompous for someone who works at a movie theater and spends all day on the computer. Report It

Racist investigator who found glove committed perjury. Another investigator took OJ's blood from lab into the crime scene. Glove didn't fit. No weapon found. No witnesses. No real blood trail found. Unfair of anyone to say with absolute certainty that he's guilty. OJ and Jury says innocent. Report It

Because people keep bringing it up. Like you. Let it go, already!

i thought we already finished and everyone knows hes a murderer

'cause the trial was so weird.

I haven't heard anyone debating about that. Most people know he's guilty.

I haven't heard any debate.

I applaud O.J. If my wife was letting some retard drive my sports car around town, a knifing is the least they would have to worry about. What makes me sick is that all the "anti-OJ" people don't even care about HIS feelings. I think he did it, and I would let him go and do it again.

Black people like to constantly stoke the fires of rage. White people like to blow the kindling. It is like Jimmy Hoffa, do we really care they haven't found him? I don't. Don't really care if they found him tomorrow. Find a cure for cancer or heart disease.

Has the jury got deliberated yet?

you tell me. that's the first I've heard of it in months.

Who is this "We" you speak of. I haven't thought about OJ in years and in another 10 seconds he will be out of my life again. I would hang out with other people if my friends and co-workers could not find more interesting things to discuss.

you might be debating it ,but i know he was not guilty so its no debate for me

Well, there does seem to be something of a contradiction in his being not guilty in criminal law, but liable in civil law. I think the reason is the burden of proof is different in the two courts, but maybe not. Maybe the civil court jury decided that he was responsible in a way that the criminal court could not find, such as being the employer or otherwise responsible for the person who actually committed the crime.

We often see these kinds of contradictions, and there's lots of room for people to speculate on why it turns out the way it does. In the case of OJ, there was all the emotional baggage of his being famous, so people form opinions who do not have anywhere near all the facts. The jury had the facts; let them do their job and get on with life, I say.

I agree that the whole thing should be over by now. But famous people in trouble never really get out of it. That's part of the price of fame.

So, there are no debates over those other murders you mentioned. Wrong, many of those things are still being debated. People still debate over whether or not someone in the Ramsey family killed JonBenet or an outside. 40 years after his death, people are still debating whether or not it was actually Oswald who didn't. The Black Dahlia is still in debate, they've recently made a movie about it. Finally, there's no question as to who killed Martin Luther King, Jr., it was James Earl Ray, that has been known since the murder happened.
We still debate OJ because the perpetrator has not been found, as with many other murders that are still debated. Any unsolved and controversial public case is more than likely still being discussed, especially the ones that you mentioned.

not his quilt,, he is as guilty as sin,, his ability to pay the civil suit that the Goldman family won in a court of law,,,, there is a difference,,,, whether he was found guilty or not,, he was found liable for a civil suit,, which means he needs to give up,,, pay the money,, or,, give up and admit guilt,,,, go sit in a jail cell where he belongs,,, on death row,, with the other murderers in the USA

your still asking about it .have not seen any one else except the white peoples do this .

I'm not. There's no question that a murderer walked. That fact has been above debate ever since the verdict was announced.

The fact that he was held civilly liable for the deaths of his two victims is because civil liability requires a lower burden of proof, but you knew that.

The only one still debating the issue is you. I haven't thought about it in years.

O.J. Simpson was found not guilty. He has the same rights as anybody else.