Redirect examination of Larry Levine

📄 Redirect examination of Larry Levine — Friday, February 7, 1997

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1997\FEB\7\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-LARRY-.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 56 of 57

◀ Direct examination of Larry Levine Both sides rest ▶

Witness: Larry Levine
Examiner: Dan Leonard
Called by: Defense • Date: Friday, February 7, 1997 • Utterances: 19

Peter Gelblum briefly cross-examined Larry Levine, a memorabilia market expert called by the defense, about his willingness to testify and the scope of his testimony. Gelblum established that Levine had agreed to testify about OJ Simpson memorabilia values, then pressed him on whether he was limiting his testimony to past losses rather than future earning potential.

# 1 MR. LEONARD:

No further questions. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. GELBLUM:

# 2 Q:

Did you offer your services to the defense today?

# 3 A:

Yes, I did.

# 4 Q:

You called them up and asked if you could testify?

# 5 A:

No. They actually called me.

# 6 Q:

Did you offer your services?

# 7 A:

They asked me if I would be willing to testify as far as the market value of O.J. Simpson memorabilia and I said I would.

# 8 Q:

When you talked about -- said in June of 1994 that this thing happened, you mean the murders of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson?

# 9 A:

Yes.

# 10 Q:

And you're not here to tell us that Mr. Simpson's not going to make money in the future, are you?

KEY QUOTE

# 11 A:

I'm here to basically testify --

# 12 Q:

My question is yes or no?

# 13 A:

Would you repeat it.

# 14 Q:

You're not here to tell us that Mr. Simpson's not going to make money in the future?

KEY QUOTE

# 15 MR. LEONARD:

Objection, argumentative.

# 16 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 17 A:

I haven't been asked that.

KEY QUOTE

# 18 MR. GELBLUM:

Nothing further.

# 19 THE COURT:

You may step down.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (2)

Peter Gelblum

You're not here to tell us that Mr. Simpson's not going to make money in the future?

Gelblum highlights the narrow scope of the defense expert's testimony, implying Simpson retains future earning capacity despite the damages claim.

Witness

I haven't been asked that.

Levine effectively concedes the point — his testimony was scoped to past memorabilia values, leaving future earnings an open question for the jury.

Notable Exchanges (1)

Peter Gelblum•Larry Levine

Gelblum pressed Levine on whether he was offering any opinion about Simpson's future earning potential; Levine's answer that he 'hadn't been asked that' conceded the limitation of his testimony.

strategic

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Larry Levine

scope limitation

Gelblum implied the expert's testimony was deliberately narrow — addressing only memorabilia market values while avoiding any opinion on Simpson's future income — undermining the defense's use of his testimony to limit damages.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 8929 • 19 utterances • Defense witness

Civil Trial

Department 103