Huh? Wrongful death causes of action have always been available. It’s not a matter of unanimity of the jury; it’s the standard of proof. Criminal cases are beyond a Reasonable doubt and civil are preponderance of the evidence. And double jeopardy is defined in the Constitution: it’s being tried twice for the same crime. Civil actions are not criminal actions. I think OJ did it beyond a reasonable doubt, but it can’t be reasonably asserted that the killing could be shown by the preponderance of the evidence as as to support a civil judgment
A civil case that is basically retrying a criminal case SHOULD be considered double jeopardy.
It is an injustice to my mind that it currently is not. It is a further injustice that someone can be tried for a violation of civil rights tenuously associated with a crime of which they were found innocent.
The justice system isn't just.