Courts may not have seen last of O.J. case Still possible: Appeals or custody

  fight

  Jonathan T. Lovitt ; Richard Price

  02/10/1997

  USA Today

  FINAL

  Page 03A

  (Copyright 1997)

  SANTA MONICA, Calif. -- The jury resumes deliberations on punitive damages

  in the O.J. Simpson civil trial today, the last page in this chapter of the

  32-month-old murder story.

  But even after this ends, Simpson could wind up in court again.

  That could happen one of two ways. First, if Simpson appeals the jury's verdict

  last week that held him liable for the attacks and he wins, the victims' families

  could press for a new trial.

  Simpson also could be forced to fight in court again for custody of his children,

  11-year-old Sydney and 8-year-old Justin.

  Nicole Brown Simpson's parents, Louis and Juditha Brown, say they'll appeal a

  judge's ruling in December that took the children away from their guardianship

  and returned them to Simpson.

  The judge refused a motion by the Browns to let them present evidence that

  Simpson killed his ex-wife. At that time, Simpson had been acquitted of the

  murders in criminal court, but the civil trial was still going on. The Browns are

  expected to base at least part of their appeal on the judge's decision.

  Judge Nancy Wieben Stock ruled that the Browns' motion was ``untimely,''

  coming late in the custody case. She also cited ``the considerable risk to the

  children of further damaging publicity that would accompany an unprecedented

  third `homicide trial.' ''

  That infuriated the Browns, who say nothing could be more damaging to the

  children than leaving them with the man they say killed their mother.

  If an appellate judge agrees that the murders should have been explored in the

  custody trial, the whole case could be put to the test again in another custody

  hearing.

  The Browns' burden of proof would be higher, however. Custody cases demand

  ``clear and convincing evidence'' to prove any allegation.

  Civil courts rely only on a ``preponderance of evidence,'' which means jurors

  award the verdict to whichever side presents the best case.

  But after winning a decisive 12-0 verdict in the civil case, the Browns believe

  they can meet the higher standard.