First-year law student Steve R. Hansen seemed at a loss to explain how the verdict could have been reached in light of the case against Simpson.

"It seems like the jury ignored all of the evidence, especially given the complexity of the trial," Hansen said. "A lot of people have lost faith in the justice system."

Third year law student Teresa A. Gonslaves said her faith in the jury system has not been shaken.

"You're probably going to hear a lot of people criticizing the jury system, but I love the jury system," Gonslaves said. "I saw a lot of room for doubt in the prosecution's case."

But not all students retained as much optimism about the criminal justice system as did Gonslaves.

Second year law student Richard Perez, who said he was leaning away from courtroom law before the Simpson trial, said watching the ordeal helped him make up his mind.

"It reaffirmed why I don't want to be a lawyer," said Perez, who plans to use his law degree in business.

Robert Fakhas, a second year law student, said he was angered by the verdict because it was clearly influenced by the lawyers involved.

"[Simpson] was guilty enough for 10 men," Fakhas said. "There was no reasonable doubt. The only reasonable doubt was an army of expensive lawyers who could talk up a storm."  --This report was compiled with Associated Press wire dispatches. Todd F. Braunstein and Justin Danilewitz also contributed to this report.Photo courtesy Associated PressFrankfurter Professor of Law ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, a member of O.J. Simpson's defense team, touches a television screen in his office at Harvard Law School immediately after his client was acquitted of dual murder. Dershowitz would have worked on Simpson's appeal if the jury had convicted the former football star.