A day centered on closing arguments, dominated by plaintiff attorney Daniel Petrocelli's sweeping presentation against O.J. Simpson. Petrocelli attacked Simpson's credibility through a 'what kind of man' rhetorical device, then systematically reviewed physical evidence from the Bundy crime scene—DNA blood drops, Bruno Magli shoe prints, hair and fiber, gloves, and socks—arguing it conclusively established Simpson's guilt. He argued against contamination and planting theories, challenged Simpson's alibi through cell phone records and limo driver testimony, and argued motive from Nicole's diary entries, their deteriorating relationship, and Simpson's retaliatory June 6 IRS letter.

• Judge Fujisaki excluded all presumption instructions for police procedures, ruling plaintiffs' earlier motion had precluded the defense from establishing necessary standards
• Petrocelli delivered comprehensive closing argument attacking Simpson's credibility and systematically reviewing Bundy physical evidence
• Petrocelli challenged Simpson's alibi for the 10:00–10:51 PM murder window using cell phone records, Alan Park's limo testimony, Kato Kaelin's thumps, and the Bronco's absence
• Petrocelli argued motive through Nicole's May 22 diary split entry, June 3 entry recording a threatening tirade, and Simpson's June 6 retaliatory IRS letter
• Court resolved verdict form dispute, siding with defense's proposed structure as more logical and less likely to mislead jury