and that's extremely typical. it's not always easy to collect on a judgment..this case highlights that. he hired good attorneys to shield his money.
I belive your primary residence and pension monies are exempt from collection in a civil suit. OJ was nearly broke after paying off The Dream Team so he nothing to pay the Goldmans after losing his civil suit but he does still collect his NFL pension so he can live in realtive comfort, relative to being stone cold six feet under ground. I think he really doesn't remember the killings, how else could you even function much less live a semi-public life. But he must know since his friend absconded with evidence. I've always wondered by someone hasn't offed him. A family member from either of the families, a hit man (for either of the families) or just some notoriety seeking nut job.
Beating a dead horse, the official unofficial rule of thumb is that in civil court, where all you have to show is proof "based on a preponderance of the evidence" - which is said to be over 50% In a criminal case, the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard is said to equate to 95% (though I've heard some people claime it's 98%). Though again, these are just highly unofficial approximations that lawyers sometimes toss around.
How much is the NFL pension? Why hasn't somebody offed him? Probably because they're the humane ones and they realize killing him won't bring back either of the two deceased.
OJ's pension is around $25,000 per month. Enough to cover all the greens fees needed to catch those criminals.
let's use A-train's example for the sake of argument "Imagine being accused of stealing somebody's jewelry, being found not guilty, then being forced to pay for the jewelry that was stolen...I wouldn't pay, either!" in this case, the prosecutor has the convince the jurors in the criminal courts that the evidence shows I stole the jewelry and they have to be 95% sure in order to convict. but on the other hand, in a civil case, the prosecutor only has to prove that i happened to be at the scene of the crime (i guess the other 50% means i wasn't there), and regardless of whether i did it or not, and thus must pay? by the way, i'm not arguing what you say is true. i'm just trying to make sense of it.
