In what was the most-watched murder trial in a generation, a jury in Los Angeles acquitted Mr. Simpson in the 1994 slayings of his former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman.

If Mr. Simpson’s 1995 trial riveted the nation, the verdict seemed to divide it, often along racial lines. And in the last 13 years, it has often seemed that Mr. Simpson was indeed convicted, in the court of public opinion.

Many people “think this guy got away with something heinous and horrible,” said a former federal prosecutor, Jean Rosenbluth. “And they think he only gets one get-out-of-jail free card.”

Now Mr. Simpson, 61, stands accused of kidnapping and armed robbery stemming from a September 2007 confrontation in which he and five men raided a room in the Palace Station Hotel and Casino, and left with hundreds of items largely related to Mr. Simpson’s athletic career that were in the possession of two collectibles dealers. The dealers insisted the items were theirs to sell.

Mr. Simpson’s lawyers argued that their client and his companions were only retrieving items that had been stolen from him. Mr. Simpson, they said, did not know two of the men were carrying guns, and never saw them brandish the weapons or physically threaten the dealers.

The case, many legal experts said, is the kind that would have been settled out of court with little fanfare had the defendant not been someone of Mr. Simpson’s notoriety.

“O. J. Simpson has no felony convictions, and someone with no felony convictions usually gets treated very favorably in situations like this,” said Dayvid Figler, a Las Vegas defense lawyer and a commentator on the case for TruTV, the cable outlet planning live gavel-to-gavel coverage. “In all likelihood, he would have been offered something so favorable at the onset that it would be resolved and he probably would do no jail time.”

The residue from the explosive 1995 trial has rubbed off on every aspect of the current case, from the swift but methodical investigation to the weeklong jury selection that seated nine women and three men.

Ten jurors are white and two are Hispanic. Mr. Simpson’s lawyers objected to the racial makeup of the jury pool and the final panel but were overruled by Judge Jackie Glass. The jury that acquitted Mr. Simpson in 1995 was made up of nine blacks, two whites and one Hispanic.

Prospective jurors were questioned at length on their views about the 1995 trial; several were dismissed after saying they thought Mr. Simpson had killed his former wife and Mr. Goldman.

“If you are here thinking you are going to punish Mr. Simpson for what happened in Los Angeles in 1995, this is not the case for you,” Judge Glass warned potential jurors.

One person who hopes memories of Mr. Simpson’s murder trial remain fresh is Mr. Goldman’s father, Fred Goldman, who has always predicted that Mr. Simpson would one day face another jury on criminal charges. Although he said he would regret if Mr. Simpson was convicted by jurors seeking to avenge his 1995 acquittal, because it would just reflect more flaws in the judicial system, Mr. Goldman added, “Any way I could see him in jail would be wonderful.”

Legal experts said the prosecution would probably benefit from an audio recording of the incident as it unfolded that was turned over to the police by the man who admitted setting up the confrontation, Thomas Riccio, a four-time felon who spent eight years in prison on convictions for arson, prison escape and dealing in stolen property.

District Attorney David Roger of Clark County has said he will not comment until after the verdict. But Laurie Levenson, a former prosecutor who covered Mr. Simpson’s murder trial for CBS News, said Mr. Roger should “be happy with any conviction.”