Jury to read O.J. Simpson verdict today

National coverage at 1 p.m. and Julayne Austin The jury of the "Trial of the Century" reached a verdict yesterday after less than four hours of deliberation. The verdict of whether or not former football great O.J. Simpson brutally murdered his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman, will be read by the jury today at 1 p.m. EDT. Judge Lance Ito said he was delaying the reading of the verdict to allow time for the attorneys and families to be present in the Los Angeles courtroom. The verdict forms were sealed and handed to the bailiff for safekeeping overnight. Before arriving at the verdict, jurors, who have been sequestered now for nearly a year, asked to hear the testimony once more of limousine driver Allan Park. Park's testimony included a minute-by-minute account of the activities at the Simpson estate the night of the murders. Last week, Prosecutor Marcia Clark told the jury that Park's testimony was unrefuted and pointed toward Simpson's guilt. At Penn, reactions to the swift verdict decision have been varied. Criminology Professor Marvin Wolfgang said a short deliberation usually indicates an acquittal. "But because the jury asked for information about the driver and they asked only for the direct examination and not the cross suggests maybe they came to a quick decision of conviction," he added. Wharton sophomore Rohit Sharma said she thought the jury would take four or five days to deliberate. "I expected it wouldn't take too long, but two hours is ridiculous," Sharma said. Wharton junior George Boston scoffed that it was "a million dollar trial for a two-hour deliberation." In the middle of the rereading of Park's testimony, jurors asked for the verdict forms, signaling that a decision had been reached. Students had many guesses as to what the verdict would be. "O.J. will not have gotten his justice if he is found guilty because the prosecution's case has too many loops and holes for the jury to have found him guilty in only two hours," Wharton senior Takila Oku said. College senior Phillipe Visser agreed that the verdict would be not guilty. "The defense raised enough doubts to make it hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he's guilty," Visser said. But some students argued that the defense's case was simply full of rhetoric. "He's definitely guilty," Wharton sophomore Trey Fitzpatrick said. "I think they've seen a lot of evidence and courtroom primping can only go so far." Visser and Boston agreed that the jurors had probably made up their minds before going in to deliberate. Regardless of students' individual beliefs about the outcome of the trial, many plan to be near a television at 1 p.m. At least seven major networks -- including ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, CNN, Court TV and ESPN -- will be providing live coverage of the verdict. "I don't know whether or not he's going to be found guilty or innocent," Engineering freshman Libby Withers said. "But I'm definitely going to watch the verdict." Other students said they were not concerned about the outcome of the trial, which has lasted for eight months. "It's been on for so long that I've lost interest in it," Engineering junior Sock Wang said. Post-baccalaureate pre-med student Glenda Callender said she would not watch the reading of the verdict due to principle. "It's past the point of absurdity," Callender said. While some people have been following the trial faithfully for more than a year, others have remained oblivious to the trial proceedings. "I'm probably the only person in America who could still be on the jury," College junior Elyse Dorkin said.