There was no physical evidence. NONE. Why is everyone so surprised unless you haven't been following the case. Which obviously, you haven't.
Amen.
The judicial system is structured so that the accused is tried by a jury of his/her peers after hearing all the evidence.
In this case the jury determined he was not guilty. I did not see any evidence that he was guilty to make me think otherwise. Yes he's weird and hangs out with druggy stuntmen but that's all I got from this case.
Agreed, comparing this to OJ is like comparing a rattlesnake to a tadpole. The OJ jury was racially biased and that's the bottom line.
If you look at the Court TV forums... people who followed these cases religiously...
They think OJ was guilty without doubt
Same for Scott Peterson mostly, though they aren't united about the death penalty since the evidence was weaker.
For Robert Blake - So far, I have seen nothing but joy over this verdict. I'm sure some are unhappy, but I haven't seen one yet.
I agree with them. No way was the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to me.
Does that matter? Are people now expecting too much from the prosecution after watching CSI too many times?