There are people who distrust or don't understand forensics and probabilities. For those people one of the most significant pieces of evidence as far as his guilt should be the Bruno Magli shoe imprints at the scene. OJ denied he owned a pair and called them "ugly ass shoes" when there are photos of him wearing them. Why would he add the "ugly ass shoes" comment if not to make his denial more emphatic and believable because he knows he wears them?
Then you could be the devil's advocate and say the prints were planted or even made up, but that doesn't explain OJ lying about owning them and it would also require someone stealing those shoes prior to the murders in anticipation of planting the shoeprints as evidence and hoping they didn't caught stealing the shoes and/or OJ didn't notice them missing. Or you would have to try and say someone found out about the murders, on the way to the murder scene bought a pair of the same bruno maglis they somehow remembered OJ wearing in a picture they had seen and then planted the shoeprints while no one at a murder scene noticed or they were all in on it.
It's ridiculous. He's as guilty as funnyb inviting lkid up to his vegas hotel room to enter some numbers into his spreadsheet.