D

D1S80—The name for the laboratory test which a California state criminalist testified was used to match Simpson’s DNA with blood drops found near the chopped up bodies of the murder victims and in stains on the steering wheel of the defendants Bronco.

DAILY NEWS—A Los Angeles area daily newspaper that aggressively covered the trial. (See: Ski Mask.)

DAISY, THE—The smart Beverly Hills nightclub where eighteen-year-old Nicole was working as a waitress when she first met the celebrity athlete who was to become her lover, then her husband. For years it was the location of Romanoff’s, an elite restaurant, before it was purchased by Jack Hanson and turned into an equally elite private club where movie star and other celebrity members and their guests discoed, played backgammon and otherwise enjoyed the good life. (See: Hanson, Jack.)

DAKOTA—The name of the Goldman family’s cat. The cat was named by Ron, who said it was the same name he had chosen for his first son.

D’AMATO, ALPHONSE—The powerful U. S. Senator and Republican pit bull from New York got his come-uppance after using a phony Japanese accent on a radio show to publicly poke fun at Judge Ito. He made an unprecedented apology for the parody on the Senate floor, and sent a letter of regret to the judge. In later remarks on a television discussion of the miscue and the flap it created, D’Amato said he and his family were embarrassed. “I hurt people and I wanted to apologize,” he declared. (See: Ito, Judge Lance A.; and Syracuse University.)

DANCING ITOS—A zany creation of Tonight Show host Jay Leno, The Dancing Itos were such a hit in their first television gig on March 2, 1995, they were repeatedly called back to continue their on-camera antics and quickly branched out with appearances elsewhere. Five Asian-Americans were recruited for the role through a Los Angeles talent agency, and the initial quintet included: Tym Buacharern, 25; Michael Gregory, 29; Hoang Ho, 21; Nito Larioza, 23; and Danny Lee, 27. They were paid $600 each for every spot aping the presiding judge of the trial and doing the boogaloo in dark judicial robes, eyeglasses and fake black beards.

The Dancing Itos also appeared with impersonators posing as other leading figures in the trial. During one NBC performance they kicked up their fishnet-stocking-covered legs in a saucy can-can, and in another did an outrageous takeoff on the Village People and the mega-hit Y. M. C. A., with a tune called O.J. L. A. In yet another appearance they donned black Mexican sombreros and provided backup for Leno and South American sexpot, Charo. (See: Fiddler On The Roof.)

DANIEL FREEMAN MEDICAL CLINIC—(See: Hampton, Tracy.)

DARDEN, CHRISTOPHER A.—The trial’s co-lead prosecutor, Darden came to the job with 15-years experience as an assistant and deputy DA, much of it concentrating on punishing police misconduct. After accepting the task of prosecuting another black who had become a celebrity icon, the Deputy DA found himself being unfairly described by some as an Uncle Tom who was hand-picked for the team specifically because of his race. Darden, 38, clashed bitterly with Simpson’s lawyers, and at one point the defense threatened to report some of his behavior they took exception to the state criminal bar. “When this case is over,” the prosecutor responded, “I’m going to be referring defense attorneys to the United States Attorney’s office.” (See: Closing Arguments: Prosecution.)

DATELINE, NBC OCTOBER 11, 1995—(See: Appendix Number VI.)

DEATH PENALTY—The District Attorney drew very little criticism when a decision was made not to seek the death penalty, despite the obvious brutality exhibited in the unprovoked slaying of two people. The DA was faced on one side with hard-liners who were expected to claim if a capital trial was rejected that Simpson was getting preferential treatment because of his celebrity, possibly even due to fears of more racially-inspired rioting. But most legal observers agreed it would have been virtually impossible to get a jury to convict the celebrity defendant if the verdict meant he would face execution in the death chamber at the grim old fortress at San Quentin. Nearly 400 men are currently on death row there.

California criminal codes provide for the death penalty to be carried out by lethal injection or in the gas chamber: the choice is up to the condemned man or woman. Crimes for which the ultimate penalty may be ordered in the Golden State are treason, homicide by a prisoner serving a life term, train wrecking, perjury causing execution and first-degree murder with special circumstances. Multiple murder constitutes one of the “special circumstances” which could have been cited if the State had decided to seek the death penalty. Instead, most people believe wisely so, they pursued prosecution based on the presumption that the slayings were a crime of passion, even though they were especially cruel and the murder of at least one of the victims was premeditated. (See: Verdict Possibilities.)

DEATH THREATS—During and after Cochran’s closing arguments, a deluge of death threats were telephoned or mailed to his luxury Wilshire Boulevard offices. The offices were sealed by security guards. (See: Nation of Islam.)

DEATH THREATS II—Cochran wasn’t the only person involved in the case to receive death threats, and in fact by the time the trial concluded principals on both sides and in the middle were targeted in letters or phone calls. Christopher Darden and other prosecutors were assigned bodyguards because of death threats, and the three surviving daughters in the Brown family also received death threats. Even Judge Ito was targeted for his controversial decision that permitted only a selected few passages into evidence from the Fuhrman tapes. Armed deputies from the LA County Sheriff’s department were assigned to protect America’s most famous judge. (See: Fuhrman Tapes.)

DEBELLO, JOHN—Manager of the restaurant where Nicole’s mother lost her prescription glasses early on the evening of the slayings. DeBello said he told Goldman, who was a waiter there, he didn’t have to make a special trip to return the glasses to Nicole. But Goldman insisted on dropping them off. (See: Crawford, Karen Lee; and Mezzaluna Trattoria.)

DECISIONQUEST, INC.—A Torrance, California firm employed as jury consultants for the prosecution. (See: Vinson, Donald; and Martel, John.)

DECOY—When Simpson attended the funeral for his ex-wife, he was treated by authorities like other mourning family members and strong efforts were made by friends and police to shield him from media intrusion. At the conclusion of the services, a black man dressed in a dark suit and tie with white shirt, and about the same build as Simpson stumbled back to his estate shielded by two companions. Aggressive photographers captured photos of the man, bent over in grief with his hand over his face. It wasn’t until much later they learned the wool was pulled over their eyes. While they were taking photographs of a decoy, Simpson was on his way to the home of a lawyer friend in Encino. In fact, as it turned out, the decoy camped at the estate for three days keeping the media’s attention, while Simpson cooled his heels at the home in the Valley. (See: Kardashian, Robert G.)

DEEDRICK, DOUGLAS—An FBI fiber expert, Deedrick offered important testimony for the prosecution and disputed a star defense witness, telling the jury that a pattern of bloody lines found on Goldman’s bluejeans did not appear to be shoeprints. He said a set of parallel lines on the material were made by the victim’s shirt brushing against the blood-drenched jeans. Similar lines on an envelope and a piece of paper could also have been caused by the bloody jeans, he said. The defense had suggested the blood smears were shoe prints, possibly from a second killer. (See: Bodziak, William; and Lee, Dr. Henry.)

DEFENSE CASE—Over 11 often agonizing weeks, the defense marched a total of 53 witnesses to the stand, representing a disparate mix of professions ranging from police officers, mobsters, scientists, a songwriter, interior designer and a barber. Their attempt was to puncture the prosecution’s time line and therefore produce reasonable doubt. When the Fuhrman Tapes were discovered, however, it was a whole new ballgame. The defense called Simpson’s grown daughter Arnelle as its first witness on July 10. On September 11 the defense refused to rest its case until an appeal was decided by a higher court, and after a few days of rebuttal by the prosecution, called more witnesses. They had hoped to wind up with an explosive appearance by harried retired LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman, but were blocked by Ito and higher court decisions. Finally, on September 22 the defense rested. (See: Prosecution Case; and Simpson, Arnelle.)

DEFENSE NEVER RESTS, THE—The bad news was F. Lee Bailey may not have set the world on fire or changed the direction of the trial with his disappointing cross-examination of an LAPD detective who was a key prosecution witness. But there was also good news. in January 1995 nearly a quarter-of-a-century-after-the-fact, Bailey’s publisher reissued his 1971 best seller The Defense Never Rests. The reissue carried a headline advising the author was “one of the top defense attorneys” on the “Dream Team.” (See: Bailey, F. Lee; and Fuhrman, Mark.)

DELIBERATIONS—The final duty of the jury, when panelists get together in private and seek to come to an agreement that will lead to a verdict about the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, or a conclusion of innocence. After electing a foreman on Friday, September 29, jurors were returned to their hotel to cool their heels before returning to the courthouse at noon Monday to begin deliberations. Another break for a religious holiday was scheduled for Wednesday however, in observance of the Jewish Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur. After that, the schedule called for jurors to deliberate from noon to 8 pm, Monday through Saturday, until a verdict was reached.

DENTISTS—Even the schedules of Los Angeles-area dentists were affected by the fallout from the marathon trial. When Ito realized he would have to stay behind for a rare Friday afternoon day-on-the job to preside over a hearing dealing with DNA tests, he instructed his assistant, “Remind me to cancel my dentist appointment—again.”

DEPARTMENT 103—The formal name for what is really Courtroom 103, which was the site of the long-running trial and many of the preliminary hearings in the Simpson case. It is located on the ninth floor of the Criminal Courts Building, which is the floor where all trials requiring special security are held. Only 80 seats were available in the gallery for spectators, and hundreds of people including media from all over the country had to be turned away daily. The courtroom was available to the public and others via the regular elevator system, but lawyers on both sides of the case used the freight elevators in order to shield themselves from the public and ensure privacy. (See: Raffle.)

DERSHOWITZ, ALAN M.—A professor at Harvard University Law School and member of the O.J. Simpson “Dream Team,” when Dershowitz entered the fray he already had a reputation for defending a glittering array of big buck clients. Known as a leading expert in constitutional law, he notched one of his most widely heralded successes when he won a reversal of the murder conviction of socialite Claus von Bulow. He wound up on the losing side when Leona Helmsley, the so-called “Queen of Mean” was convicted on charges of tax evasion. Dershowitz also worked on behalf of heavyweight boxer, Mike Tyson who was sent to prison in Indiana for raping a contestant in a beauty pageant.

During the Simpson trial Dershowitz took a backseat role to the upfront, on-camera work of Cochran, Bailey and Shapiro and according to the consensus of most court watchers concentrated on one of the things he does best—possible appeals.

Early in the trial, Dershowitz raised the ire of the Fraternal Order of Police and others by twice going on camera and telling national television audiences police offers were taught to lie. Dershowitz made the statements on CNN’s Larry King Live, and on ABC’s Good Morning America. In a formal letter the national president of the F.O.P. branded the remarks as “outrageous” and asked the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers to investigate the Boston lawyer for possible violations of legal ethics.

DESEQUESTRATION—Judge Ito rejected a defense request in September to modify desequestration of the jury, and allow them to return to their homes at the end of each days proceedings for the remainder of the trial. “This jury should no longer be made to suffer,” Cochran had told Ito. Prosecutor Clark disagreed and argued vehemently against the proposal. What the defense really wanted was for jurors to be exposed to the incendiary world of posters, signs and television programs referring to the case that waited outside for them, she asserted. (See: Sequestration.)

“DEVON-SHIRE”—(See: Peace, Jennifer.)

DEWYER, LIEUTENANT JOHN—Chief of the legal unit at the Mens’ Correctional Center, whose job it is to ensure that all legalities are being observed in the handling of prisoners. Lt. Dewer visited with Simpson for a few minutes every morning to confirm he was being treated properly and there were no problems.

DIAZ, MARTHA LORRIE—Selected excerpts from a several-years-old tape-recorded conversation she had with a LAPD detective were leaked to the press. Some of the excerpts dealt with the officers dislike for homosexuals on the San Francisco Police Department. Others denigrated female cops and black ex-cons and touched on his readiness to use violence. At one point in the chat he said: “If they pull a gun on me, I’m going to kill ‘em. Kill anybody that…” A bit later he said “You sound like a nigger. You’re talking shit. Until you’ve done something, you can’t talk about it. I’ve been to Vietnam. I’ve killed people.” (See: Fuhrman Tapes; McKinny, Laura Hart; and News Leaks.)

DICK VAN DYKE SHOW, THE—A neighbor who was disturbed by the barking of Nicole’s Akita cited the Nick at Night cable show after he was called by prosecutors as a witness to help establish the time of the slayings. Steven Schwab testified he left the house to walk his dog at 10:30 pm, and remembered the time because he had just finished watching an episode of The Dick Van Dyke Show. The testimony was important to the prosecution’s effort to discredit Simpson’s alibi and establish that he had time to commit the murders and return to his estate before he was seen there by a limousine driver. (see Schwab, Steven; and Time Line/Time Window.)

DIMITRIUS, JO-ELLAN HEUBNER—A consultant with offices in Pasadena who was called on by the defense to help select the Simpson jury. One of a new breed of experts utilized for high-stakes jury trials, Ms. Dimitrius, 41, previously helped pick panels in the McMartin pre-school child molestation case, both the state and federal trials of four of the LAPD officers accused in the Rodney G. King beating, and in the case filed over the beating of truck driver Reginald O. Denny who got caught in the wrong neighborhood during the riots.

Like most other jury consultants, she works by researching the background of prospective jurors through questionnaires and by studying them in the courtroom. Jury consulting is part social research, part sophisticated technology, but many trial lawyers firmly believe when the experts are on target it can make the difference between verdicts of guilty or not guilty. (See: Jury; and Jury Pool.)

DISCOVERY RULES—When California legislators took the lead and ensured their courts had the strongest “discovery” requirements of any state, one of the primary objects was speeding up trials. It didn’t necessarily work out that way in the Simpson trial. The discovery process requires each side to share documents and other pertinent information with each other before it’s openly disclosed in the courtroom. It tends to eliminate surprises like those that occur so often in fictional courtroom dramas shown in movies and on television. But during the Simpson trial it was also an important factor in the snail’s pace the proceeding took. Thanks in part to the strong discovery rules, trial lawyers already had their guns out and loaded and were ready to shoot legal bullets at every tiny point the other side was trying to make. (See: Bankers Hours.)

DISCRIMINATION SUIT—The LAPD was named in a lawsuit filed in August charging it with condoning racism by failing to stop retaliation “against its black officers who have complained about widespread, systematic racism with the department.” Seven black officers joined together in the action, which was one of a flurry of civil-rights related lawsuits filed against the Department and the chief labor bargaining unit representing LAPD officers during the racially-charged Simpson proceedings. (See: Police Protective League.)

DIVORCE—O.J. and Nicole were divorced in October 1992, after she endured years of her husband’s tom-catting ways, beatings and emotional abuse. Nicole told him in January that she wanted a separation, and when she filed she gave her lawyer a long list of reasons she wanted out of the marriage including her husband’s infidelities.

She wrote that when she confronted him about running around on her with other women, he slammed her against the apartment walls then pitched her clothes out a window. There were other problems such as beatings, threats and other emotional abuse. One day she found a woman’s earring in her bed, that wasn’t hers.

At the time of the divorce filing the couple had the Brentwood estate valued between $5 and $7 million with a full household staff; a plush seaside house in Laguna Beach valued at about $2 million; and a five-room condo in the Bristol Plaza on Manhattan’s toney East Side that cost more than $1 million. They also owned a fleet of cars including a pair of Ferrari convertibles, as well as closets full of fine clothes, jewelry and other valuables. Their living expenses at the Rockingham estate alone were staggering, with annual costs of such items listed in the divorce documents as $13,488 for utilities; $10,129 gardening; and $4,371 for services keeping up the pool and tennis court. But they also took frequent holidays to exotic holiday vacation spots in Hawaii, oceanside Mexican resorts or skiing trips to Vail and Aspen, always flying first-class. For shorter jaunts such as trips to Las Vegas, they sometimes chartered a private aircraft.

Nicole wanted her husband to buy her the house she was living in on Gretna Green Way or a house of equal value, $1.2 million; $7,000 in alimony and $13,000 in monthly child support. They also disputed such things as $6,200 per month Nicole asked for clothing, entertainment and travel, and another $2,500 for incidental expenses. O.J. also objected to a $4,000 item for medical expenses.

According to the settlement at last hammered out with the help of a prenuptial agreement, Nicole got custody of their son and daughter and was awarded $10,000 per month in child support but no alimony. The settlement included a lump sum payment to Nicole of $433,700 that was tax free. The couple remained friendly on an on-and-off basis after the divorce however, were frequently seen together, and even joined with friends in an out-of-country vacation. (See: Jaffe and Clements; and Prenuptial Agreement.)

DNA—Prosecutors deliberately omitted any mention of DNA during their opening statements. The DNA evidence was considered to be so overwhelming and so convincing, they made a strategic decision to withhold the information until later in the trial when it would have the greatest, most dramatic impact. Use of the acronym DNA is an easy way-out for most people when talking about deoxyribonucleic acid, a chemical that’s even longer than its spelling. It’s a tightly wound three-foot-long chemical inside almost every cell in the body. DNA is packaged into 46 chromosomes, 23 from the mother’s egg and 23 from the father’s sperm. And it contains the secrets that make every living thing unique, which is why it is such a powerful new tool for forensics scientists.

The amazing new forensics technology was developed by British geneticist Alec Jeffries, Ph.D., in 1985, and was first used successfully to help solve the rape murders of two teenage girls in the Leicester district. Semen and blood samples indicated both girls, although murdered nearly three-years apart in 1983 and 1986, were victims of the same killer. Based on police conclusions that the killer lived in the area and was between 13 and 30-years-old, blood samples were taken from more than 5,500 men in that age group and DNA analyses were conducted. There wasn’t a single matching DNA pattern, and police were considering widening the net when they got a lucky break. Gossip in a local pub led to discovery that a man had obtained a sample from a co-worker and identified it as his own when he turned it in to police.

The hoaxer was arrested, a blood sample was taken, and when a DNA test was conducted his unique gene pattern was a perfect match with the genetic fingerprints of DNA extracted from semen found on the slain teenagers. Since the technique spread to the United States, hundreds of people have been convicted and many others have been cleared, largely on the basis of their genetic fingerprints.

Genetic fingerprinting works with blood, semen, saliva, hair roots and body tissue, and DNA has been called the “blueprint of life.” DNA can be extracted and studied from any living thing, people, dogs, cat-fish or chrysanthemums. One common technique used by biochemists to conduct tests calls for extracting DNA samples from blood or other substances, then separating the white and red cells. DNA is then extracted from the white cells, cut into pieces and the fragments placed into a gel with electrodes at both ends. Once an electric current has separated the chunks by size, they are transferred to a nylon membrane and exposed to radiation. Appearance of a unique visible pattern of bands is the result. If the bands in the test DNA match the bands obtained from a crime scene sample, chances the two specimens came from the same person are astronomically positive. (See: “Chopping Up The DA; and DNA Wars.)

DNA WARS—The term commonly used for the critical battle between attorneys and scientific experts for the prosecution and defense over the reliability of DNA evidence, including methods of sample collection, handling and analysis and of the legalities surrounding its admissibility in a murder trial. Three different laboratories conducted DNA testing in the case, a development that was unprecedented for criminal trials.

Prosecutors struggled to make the mystifying material sound less like scientific gobblydegook and more like carefully examined evidence and meticulously assembled information that pointed a damning finger of guilt at the defendant. There were times nevertheless when jurors appeared to be to preoccupied with other matters or about to doze off while lawyers and witnesses droned on for weeks about such mind-boggling matters as Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium theory, population restructuring, P.C.R., R.F.L.P., D1S80 and D. Q.-alpha.

Facing a grueling trial against some of the most skilled and experienced criminal defense lawyers in the nation, without either eyewitnesses or a murder weapon, and with a popular celebrity defendant, the DNA Wars were critical important to the State’s case. Prosecutors needed to mark up a crushingly conclusive victory over the defense if they were to have any chance of winning a conviction. Most expert observers agreed the prosecution succeeded in it’s effort. One local law school professor described Dr. Cotton’s devastating DNA testimony as “a defining moment in the trial, and a turning point.”

Operating from the vantage point of hindsight, some legal experts indicated belief the defense erred in failing to challenge the blood evidence during the preliminary hearings. If they had dug in their heels for a sustained pre-trial brawl over DNA however, their client could have cooled his heels behind bars for a year waiting them out. And most of the evidence would probably have been permitted in, anyway. (See: Cotton, Dr. Robin.)

DOG WORLD—A nationally distributed magazine based in Chicago which dispatched reporter John Cargill to Los Angeles to cover three-days of the trial. Cargill wrote a story tied to the important role played by Nicole’s Akita leading to early discovery of the twin murders and pinning down the time of the slayings. The magazine is published monthly and sold to about 60,000 readers. Cargill, 48, who holds a full-time job as an administrator for the Osler Institute in Brazil, Indiana, which is engaged in the on-going education of medical doctors, is a longtime owner of Akitas. Akitas are known for holding in their emotions, but when they let them out they pour out, Cargill told another reporter. (See: Boztepe, Sukru; and Kato.)

DOMESTIC DISCORD—Early in January opposing attorneys tangled outside the presence of the jury over how much testimony or other evidence of 61 alleged incidents of domestic abuse allegedly committed by the defendant on Nicole during the 17-years of their spotty relationship would be allowed in the trial. During the spirited dispute Simpson’s lawyers accused the State of character assassination. Prosecutors ultimately withdrew 18 reputed instances of abuse. A few days later, Judge Ito ruled that much of the information about alleged domestic abuse would be allowed. (See: Gretna Green Way, 327; Nicole Brown Simpson Charitable Foundation; 911 Tapes; and Spousal Battery.)

DONALDSON, MICHAEL C.—A lawyer who represented the Brown family in a dispute with the defendant over videotapes of his wedding to Nicole. The Beverly Hills lawyer also represented Johnnie Cochran’s former wife, in the sale of a book tied to her life and experiences with the man who became the lead-defense attorney. (See: Berry, Barbara Cochran; Black Box News, Inc.; Life After Johnnie; and Wedding Video.)

DOUGLAS, CARL—One of Simpson’s lawyers, Douglas got into trouble after misinforming the judge about a taped interview with housemaid Rosa Lopez. Douglas said there was none, and he was embarrassed when the defense had to admit in the courtroom that there was indeed a tape and it was in their possession. (See: Lopez, Rosa; and Pavelic, William.)

DOUROUX, BERNIE—The tow-truck driver who hauled Simpson’s vehicle to an impound lot. Douroux testified he didn’t see any blood on the inside or outside of the car.

DOVE AUDIO/DOVE BOOKS—A Beverly Hills company that took a leading role in publication of books related to the Simpson trial. Three books were produced by Dove in near record time. (See: Abrahamson, Alan; Kennedy, Tracy; Mistrial of the Century; Nicole Brown Simpson: The Private Diary of a Life Interrupted; Private Diary of an O.J. Juror; The; Resnick, Faye; Viner, Michael; and Walker, Mike.)

DQ-ALPHA—One of the DNA tests conducted on blood collected by evidence technicians. (See: DNA; and DNA Wars.)

DR. DRE—(See: Natural Born Killaz.)

DREAM TEAM—Name coined by the press to describe the squad of high-powered, high-profile and high-priced lawyers assembled to represent Simpson on the charges he slaughtered his ex-wife and her friend. Expanding one and two-at-a-time, the squad of lawyers eventually grew to a couple of dozen or more, including many who worked behind the scenes. According to published reports, when the murders occurred Simpson had personal assets of about $10.8 million and a combined annual income of about $800,000 from his work as a rent-a-car pitchman and as a football commentator.

Early in the proceedings it was estimated he was laying out $56,000 per-day for his high-powered defense, but as the trial progressed and more attorneys, professional consultants and other support personnel climbed aboard the costs are believed to have spiraled. He’s said to have been expecting early in the case to spend $4 million on his defense. The financially hard-pressed State didn’t lag far behind on expenditures, and wound up laying out much more taxpayer money for his prosecution than was initially anticipated. A “Dream Team” defense, and prosecution, is expensive. At one point in the trial Cochran said of the prosecution: “Their whole case is based upon hopes and dreams, and they’re evaporating.” Darden acidly responded: “Nobody calls us the dream team.” (See: Antonovich, Michael D.)

DREAM TEAM SPLIT—Personality clashes, petty bickering and other troubles plagued the defense’s “Dream Team” almost from the beginning of the trial. And when the proceeding was concluded, the bad feelings and anger broke out into the open for good. Things started off a few hours after the verdict, when defense lawyer Robert Shapiro talked with ABC-TV’s Barbara Walters and criticized Johnnie Cochran for playing the race card during summations. He added that he was “deeply offended” by the injection of Adolf Hitler into the arguments, and said he would never work with Cochran or with his former pal, F. Lee Bailey again. “I will never talk to F. Lee Bailey again,” he declared.

Bailey struck back on NBC-TV’s Today Show, describing Shapiro as “a sick little puppy. “I don’t mind Bob attacking me—he did that in January, he said of an incident when Shapiro called him a “snake.” “But to attack Johnnie Cochran as he did is unforgivable…” The January clashed preceded by only a few days a change of leadership in the “Dream Team” when Cochran took over the reins from Shapiro.

So what did Cochran have to say about all that? The chief defense attorney spoke out on KCAL-TV in Los Angeles. Shapiro’s “ego has really gotten crushed in the course of this trial and I feel very sorry for him.” (See: “Dream Team;” Hitler; Lunch; and Manslaughter.)

DREAMS—Dreams came up at least twice during the investigation and trial, including the testimony of one of Simpson’s friends, a onetime Los Angeles cop. The former officer said on the stand the defendant confided to him after Nicole’s death that he had dreamed of killing her. The ex-cop said his famous pal chuckled when he mentioned the dream. (See: Polygraph; and Shipp, Ronald.)

DREYFUSS, RICHARD—One of the Hollywood stars who dropped in on the trial to study the participants and prepare for a courtroom film role. (See: Bosson, Barbara.)

DUCOULOMBIER, GEORGE—A spokesman at the Mens’ Correctional Center where Simpson was locked up.

DUNKIN, JOHN—An LAPD lieutenant who announced to the press that investigators had turned up “definitive” physical proof that tied Simpson to the crime scene.

DUNNE, DOMINICK—Writer for Vanity Fair magazine and an author awarded one of the precious seats set aside for the press at the trial. Dunne planned to write a book about the case.

DUNTON, JOHN—A convicted forger, Dunton created a stir when he announced that a private detective had witnessed the murders. When the 32-year-old man refused to testify before the Grand Jury investigating Cowlings, a judge sent him to jail for contempt of court. Dunton claimed he was afraid he would be killed if he agreed to testify. (See: Cowlings, A.C. “Al.”)

DURIO, CARMELITA SIMPSON—Like her younger sister, Shirley Baker, Mrs. Durio attended almost every day of their brother, O.J. Simpson’s marathon trial from a front-row seat just behind the defense table. Both sisters live in the San Francisco area and temporarily moved into Simpson’s Brentwood estate so they could attend the trial. They were frequent visitors to their brother at the jail. Mrs. Durio is older than O.J. (See: Shipp, Ronald.)