Quote Originally Posted by Thorne View Post
And I have yet to figure out how a person who was not criminally responsible for committing a crime could be held financially responsible. The OJ Simpson murder case comes to mind. If he was not guilty of killing the two people, how can he be held financially liable? Doesn't make sense to me.
It has to do with differing burdens of proof. You're not actually ever found innocent in a criminal case, simply "not guilty" due to the State's failure to meet its burden of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt".

In a civil matter, the burden of proof is "by a preponderance of the evidence".

So a criminal jury must have a significantly higher degree of certainty than a civil one.