Oh, yes, BillD, I'd forgotten that about OJ's jurors. Maybe the system should change so that a mistrial can be declared even after a verdict is returned and the jurors dismissed, when testimony like that comes out afterward. Or is there already a law like that on the books that simply hasn't been applied in OJ's case because of the publicity of the first trial and the improbability of finding an impartial jury the second time around??

For that matter, wouldn't that be a stumbling block for any repeat trial of a high-profile case – finding an impartial jury?