“I am disappointed in the verdict because it is what we call jury nullification; they couldn’t get O.J. on the murders so they are getting him on this. I don’t think they had the evidence for this verdict,” offers Pamela Hayes, legal analyst for CNN Headline News for the OJ Simpson/Nevada trial. She’s referring to the verdict thirteen years ago, on October 3, 1995, in which Simpson was found “not guilty” of the gruesome 1994 double murder of his estranged wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and Ronald Goldman in the criminal case.
“I have issues about how they kidnapped somebody when all they did was keep him in a room. It is a little questionable because he wasn’t moved from one place to another. I don’t know how they can remotely say they have a kidnapping. With regards to the robbery, there was no intimidation because they were all boys. I think that this is just a publicity stunt that went awry. I was quite surprised. But on the other hand, if they picked a jury of people who hate OJ, it’s expected.”
Simpson was found guilty by an all white jury of 12 charges, including robbery with a deadly weapon, burglary with a firearm, assault with a deadly weapon, first-degree kidnapping with use of a deadly weapon, coercion with use of a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit robbery, conspiracy to commit kidnapping and conspiracy to commit a crime.
The 61-year-old Hall of Fame star could spend the rest of his life in jail for seizing his sport’s memorabilia including game balls, plaques and photos with force. Two of the men with Simpson were armed.
In terms of Simpson’s sentencing, which is scheduled for Friday, December 5, Hayes believes he should receive the minimum term because he hasn’t had any prior convictions. That could mean 15 years. She continues, “They [his attorneys] are going to have to do the work to try and overturn that conviction through appeals or post conviction release. That’s what I expect his lawyers to do.” -yvette caslin
