📄 Direct examination of Leroy Taft — Friday, February 7, 1997
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1997\FEB\7\DIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-LEROY-TA.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 56 of 57

Direct examination of Leroy Taft

Witness: Leroy Taft
Examiner: Peter Gelblum
Called by: Plaintiff • Date: Friday, February 7, 1997 • Utterances: 51
Leroy Taft, OJ Simpson's business manager, testified about Simpson's inability to commercially exploit his name and likeness due to organized public opposition. Taft described how infomercials were blocked by TV companies, 800-number phone lines were flooded with crank calls, and memorabilia shows were cancelled due to bomb threats — all undermining the plaintiff's expert's claim that Simpson could earn two to three million dollars annually.
1 Q:

Morning, Mr. Taft.

2 A:

Morning.

3 Q:

Before we get back to the summary of financial condition of Mr. Simpson and his statement of net worth, let me ask you a couple questions. You heard yesterday about the six trademarks that were applied for Mr. Simpson?

4 A:

Yes, I did.

5 Q:

Was one dollar ever made off any of those trademarks?

6 A:

No, they were not.

7 Q:

You heard about two lawsuits Mr. Simpson filed to protect his name and likeness yesterday?

8 A:

Yes.

9 Q:

What happened to those?

10 A:

Those cases were dismissed with prejudice.

11 Q:

And, by the way, we've heard these assertions from Mr. Freeman, who didn't see any documents relative to expenditures, were you asked to bring one piece of paper relative to Mr. Simpson's expenditures for your testimony here today?

12 A:

No.

13 Q:

Was there a subpoena issued to you relative to this phase of the trial?

14 A:

Yes.

15 Q:

Were you required by that subpoena to bring one piece of paper relative to Mr. Simpson's expenditures?

16 A:

Not that I recall. All I recall is that we complied completely with both the Court order ordering certain records to be produced and the personal subpoena duces tecum served on me.

17 Q:

As custodian of records of Mr. Simpson's financial documents?

18 A:

Correct.

19 Q:

All right. Now, we talked a little bit about the video situation that Mr. Simpson was in, and it wasn't a commercial success. Do you recall that?

20 A:

Yes.

21 Q:

Would you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what happened relative to the marketing of that video produced by, I guess, Mr. Hoffman?

22 A:

Yes. The video itself, as a production product, was considered very successful by many people. The problem was we couldn't market it very successfully, or the production company couldn't market it very successfully, because it was marketing under two sources. One, an 800 telephone line and, two, it had a budget for infomercials to be sold on television. The infomercials course -- we couldn't get one television company, not one, to take our money or the production company money to produce an infomercial to advertise the video. So we were completely blocked on one of the main sources for marketing. The other source, Mr. Baker, was the -- was the telephone, the 800 number, which as soon as that number was announced, we were flooded, that is, the operators were flooded by crank calls, people that didn't agree with the criminal verdict were blocking virtually -- blocking hundreds of thousands of calls within hours, blocking the lines from those people that wanted to get in to order the video.

23 Q:

When Mr. Simpson has attempted to market any type of memorabilia or sports items, have similar things occurred, i.e., blocking or demonstrations?

24 A:

Yes.

25 Q:

And where did that occur?

26 A:

Well, one specifically was a show that was to be scheduled in Atlantic City where we got bomb -- where the promoter got bomb threats and threats there was going to be a mass demonstration, and the promoter finally had to cancel the show. He even attempted to move it to New Jersey and met with a similar fate.

27 Q:

And do you have an opinion whether it's a concentrated effort by people in the public to ensure that Mr. Simpson cannot sell any of his memorabilia?

28 MR. GELBLUM:

Objection, no foundation.

29 THE COURT:

Sustained.

30 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) You have in the past years watched and attempted to sell some of Mr. Simpson's name and likeness to produce income for him to live on, have you not?

31 A:

Yes.

32 Q:

You have, you in your duties and responsibilities as business manager of Mr. Simpson, had occasion to become familiar with what is going on relative to preclude Mr. Simpson from marketing any memorabilia or his name and likeness?

33 A:

Yes.

34 Q:

And tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what your opinion is relative to whether or not there's organized members of our country trying to preclude Mr. Simpson from earning a living?

35 MR. GELBLUM:

Objection, no foundation. Talk about what he's experienced himself.

36 THE COURT:

Sustained as to foundation. Witness may state what he observed.

37 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) What did you observe relative to the -- anything that's organized to prevent Mr. Simpson from selling sports memorabilia?

38 A:

Well, in the several discussions I had with people that do promote shows for sports memorabilia --

39 MR. GELBLUM:

Objection, called for hearsay.

40 THE COURT:

Overruled. It's his observation as to his marketing efforts.

41 A:

In discussing these matters relative to their interest to promote a show where Mr. Simpson would attend, they -- they themselves felt that it wasn't worth the grief because they knew from prior experience, and they'd seen it, that there was organized and unorganized demonstrations, and it also concerned the other athletes that might also be in attendance at those shows.

42 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Okay. Now, Mr. Taft, we've heard testimony from Mr. Roesler, who's sitting here in the audience, that Mr. Simpson could earn between two and a half and three million dollars a year.

43 MR. GELBLUM:

Misstates the testimony. It's two to three million.

44 MR. BAKER:

I'm sorry. It's two to three million. That's about a 50 percent difference; is that right. Two to three million.

45 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) In any event, would you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury when Mr. Simpson had a contract with NBC, had a contract with Hertz, had an untarnished image, and was selling memorabilia, would you tell the most he earned including all of his contracts, all of his personal appearances, and sports memorabilia?

46 A:

Yeah. I would say as an average, in what I would call his glory days, where he was working for NBC, he was working for Hertz, he was doing movies, he was doing television appearances, and he was selling some sports memorabilia through sports shows, maybe during that time he might have reached two and a half million dollars a year, gross. Then he had taxes of 45 percent. Then he had expenses on top of that. So it's -- it's ludicrous to say, in my opinion, that he could earn this kind of money that Mr. Roesler testified to.

47 Q:

And what was, approximately, your best estimate as to how --the most he ever earned on sports memorabilia in any given year?

48 A:

Well, before all of this occurred.

49 Q:

Sure. Before any of this occurred?

50 A:

Before any of this occurred it would have been maybe 200,000.

KEY QUOTE
51 MR. BAKER:

I don't have any further questions.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Leroy Taft
we couldn't get one television company, not one, to take our money or the production company money to produce an infomercial to advertise the video
Establishes that Simpson's ability to market himself was actively blocked, not merely reduced
Leroy Taft
it's ludicrous to say, in my opinion, that he could earn this kind of money that Mr. Roesler testified to
Direct rebuttal to plaintiff's damages expert, framing the two-to-three million figure as unrealistic
Leroy Taft
before any of this occurred it would have been maybe 200,000
Caps Simpson's historical sports memorabilia income at a fraction of what plaintiffs claimed he could earn going forward
Leroy Taft
the promoter got bomb threats and threats there was going to be a mass demonstration, and the promoter finally had to cancel the show
Concrete example of how public hostility translated into lost income opportunities

Evidence (4)

Informal
Simpson's video produced by Hoffman — marketed via 800 number and infomercials
discussed
Informal
Six trademarks applied for by Simpson, none of which generated revenue
discussed
Informal
Two lawsuits filed by Simpson to protect his name and likeness, both dismissed with prejudice
discussed
Informal
Subpoena duces tecum served on Taft and court order for financial records
referenced

Notable Exchanges (2)

Robert BakerPeter Gelblum
Gelblum corrected Baker's misstatement of Roesler's testimony ('two and a half to three million' vs. 'two to three million'); Baker acknowledged the correction with mild sarcasm ('That's about a 50 percent difference')
strategic
Robert BakerPeter GelblumHiroshi Fujisaki
Two sustained objections blocked Baker's attempt to elicit Taft's opinion about 'organized' public opposition; judge narrowed the testimony to observed facts only
procedural

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Roesler (plaintiff's expert)
lay opinion rebuttal
Taft directly called Roesler's two-to-three million dollar earning estimate 'ludicrous,' contrasting it with Simpson's actual peak earnings of roughly two and a half million gross before taxes and expenses, and pre-incident memorabilia income of only ~$200,000

Objections

4 objections (2 sustained, 1 overruled)
Proceeding 8909 • 51 utterances • Plaintiff witness
Civil Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 FEB 7, 1997 📄 Direct examination of Leroy Ta
FEB 7, 1997 KRT DvH TD