Jury Bias Freed OJ -- Now He Cries Jury Bias

O.J Simpson's attorneys are planning to appeal the verdict that found their client guilty of all 12 charges, including armed robbery and kidnapping with a deadly weapon.  And the reason they insist the Juice was unfairly judged was -- are you sitting down?  -- Jury bias.

I know, it sounds like a Jay Leno monologue one-liner, given that their appellate grounds happen to be the very reason Simpson's murdering butt hasn't been squatting in a prison cell these past 13 years.

But it gets better.   Part of the bias argument stems from the fact that there were no blacks on the jury. I'm literally holding my stomach in laughter as I type. 

Lest we forget -- the jury that acquitted OJ of all charges in his 1995 trial for the brutal murders of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman  -- despite overwhelmingly probative DNA evidence -- was 75% black and 100% wrong.

His current attorneys are seeking a new trial, arguing that white jurors punished OJ not for the matter at hand, but rather for alleged unpunished crimes past.  

But wasn't OJ acquitted by a black jury 13 years ago based on that very same reasoning?
O.J Simpson's attorneys are planning to appeal the verdict that found their client guilty of all 12 charges, including armed robbery and kidnapping with a deadly weapon.  And the reason they insist the Juice was unfairly judged was -- are you sitting down?  -- Jury bias.

I know, it sounds like a Jay Leno monologue one-liner, given that their appellate grounds happen to be the very reason Simpson's murdering butt hasn't been squatting in a prison cell these past 13 years.

But it gets better.   Part of the bias argument stems from the fact that there were no blacks on the jury. I'm literally holding my stomach in laughter as I type. 

Lest we forget -- the jury that acquitted OJ of all charges in his 1995 trial for the brutal murders of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman  -- despite overwhelmingly probative DNA evidence -- was 75% black and 100% wrong.

His current attorneys are seeking a new trial, arguing that white jurors punished OJ not for the matter at hand, but rather for alleged unpunished crimes past.  

But wasn't OJ acquitted by a black jury 13 years ago based on that very same reasoning?