body: Referring to the [O.J. case](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/14268/why-did-double-jeopardy-not-apply-in-the-o-j-case), how can a civil court (or any legitimate court system) determine that you have indeed beat someone to death, now we are ordering you to pay damages and then you may walk free... this goes so badly against my sense of justice that I was wondering if anyone has a justification for it. In Finland where I'm from, the charge for causing a death in any way is always a criminal charge; you can't start a civil suit over it (as far as I know).
  
  
  
title: Why a civil court can order damages for killing a person?