As promised, Florida lawyer Yale Galanter and his Nevada colleague Malcolm P. LaVergne, the attorneys for O.J. Simpson, today filed a Petiton for Rehearing with the Nevada Supreme Court, which recently affirmed the former football great's conviction on robbery and other counts but granted his fall partner a new trial.
In their petition, the lawyers allege the high court misapprehended the law in regard to restrictions on jury selection in its Oct. 22 decision. The argument has to do with juror bias -- and the fact that a juror rarely admits his or her bias. Clearly, many Americans believe Simpson is a remorseless killer, and that might lead them to be biased.
Also, the attorneys allege the high court failed to address the fact two potential jurors who are African-American were wrongfully struck from the juryu pool.
The attorneys further allege Simpson's rights were violated due in large part to public opinion. Acquitted in the brutal murder of his ex-wife and her friend in June 1994 after a sensational nine-month trial in 1995 that received unprecedented publicity, Simpson to this day lives in infamy.
His attorneys put it well when they wrote the name O.J. Simpson "is shorthand for someone who got away with murder."
They argue the baggage he carries from the first trial deprived him of his right to a fair trial in the second, when Simpson and other men on the night of Sept. 13, 2007 robbed two men in their Las Vegas hotel room.