Subscribe: Home Delivery Special!

sacbee.com Web
Shopping Yellow Pages

A tragic injury brings change

Family lost suit but spurred era of safer football gear

By Melody Gutierrez - mgutierrez@sacbee.com

Last Updated 7:40 pm PST Thursday, December 13, 2007
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A12

Print | | | |

Part two of a two-part series

O.J. Simpson didn't know Ernie Pelton. But he did know football. To a Sacramento Superior Court jury, that was all that mattered.

It was March 10, 1970, and Simpson – winner of the Heisman Trophy and an NFL running back – was in town to testify on behalf of football helmet maker Rawlings Sporting Goods Co. The manufacturer was the target of a $3.6 million civil liability lawsuit filed by Ernie's parents.

This month marks the 40th anniversary of the bone-jarring tackle that horribly altered Ernie's life. A quick, agile halfback for Rio Linda High School, he was a spirited 18-year-old kid, "a kick in the pants," as one teammate said.

The tackle came on the second-half kickoff return. Ernie took a few staggering footsteps on the sidelines. He would never walk again.

And while he would live an unremarkable life in the decades that followed, cared for until he died by a succession of family members, there are those who believe Ernie Pelton deserves credit for helping to make football safer.

His family said in its lawsuit that his helmet did not protect him when he was tackled, and blamed his subsequent severe brain injury on it. The landmark 1970 Sacramento trial that followed put a national spotlight on the need for helmet testing and safety improvements.

In their opening statement, Rawlings' attorneys had argued passionately that the Peltons' lawsuit threatened not just a sporting goods company, but the future of the game itself. Simpson – in a dark sports coat, white dress shirt and tie – was on the witness stand for one purpose: to vouch not only for the helmet but for the sport of football as well.

"I'll take O.J. Simpson's word any time," David Rust, Rawlings' attorney, told the jury.

'The Pelton boy'

Simpson was called to testify on the 33rd day of the trial.

He said he had worn a Rawlings HND helmet since his high school playing days in San Francisco. It was the same kind Ernie was wearing on Nov. 10, 1967, when he was hit.

"I believe in this helmet," Simpson told the jury, according to newspaper accounts.

The Peltons' lawyer, Harry Philo, a Detroit attorney who had settled one other helmet case out of court, alleged that Ernie had been tackled on a helmet-to-helmet hit by Allan Sakaoka, an Elk Grove High School linebacker.

Philo asked Simpson what would happen if head-down helmet contact – also known as spearing – was eliminated.

"I'd score a thousand touchdowns," Simpson said.

Michael Gessford, a Sacramento attorney helping in Rawlings' defense, had Simpson read the warning label on Ernie's helmet: "Some game impacts will exceed the capabilities of this helmet and you may suffer severe brain injury or death. Avoid all purposeful contact, whether blocking, tackling or carrying the ball."

Gessford: "Do you do that?"

Simpson: "I try but haven't succeeded."

Gessford wondered if Simpson was aware of the risks in football.

"A person would be pretty ignorant if he didn't know," Simpson said. "I know every time I get on the field, there's a chance you can get hurt like the Pelton boy."

The testimony concluded, Simpson left. But not before the jurors sent a note to the judge asking if they could have Simpson's autograph, Gessford said in a recent interview.

In the Sacramento Union newspaper the next day, a picture showed the football star smiling before a group of people. The caption reads: "Simpson signs autographs for jurors."

Margaret Pelton, Ernie's 82-year-old mother who now lives in an assisted-living home in South Land Park, remembers the defeated look on the face of her husband, Dan, following Simpson's testimony.

"My husband told me we had it made until O.J. Simpson came in," she said during a recent interview in her room. "Then he knew we had lost."

For the next 56 court days – the remainder of the trial – the defense hammered on the theory that Ernie was not hit head-to-head and that the helmet was not responsible. It was a rotational injury, the defense said, meaning the damage to his brain occurred after he was hit on the chin and his head swiveled.

Continue reading on next page

 

About the writer:

  • Call The Bee's Melody Gutierrez, (916) 326-5521. Bee researcher Sheila A. Kern contributed to this report.
Recommend this story at Yahoo! Buzz:

The Sacramento Bee Unique content, exceptional value. SUBSCRIBE NOW!


Most Popular
 

SUBSCRIBE NOW!


RELATED STORIES



Top Jobs

View All Top Jobs
QUICK JOB SEARCH

Enter Keyword(s):
Enter a City:

Select a State:

Select a Category:


 
 



News  |  Sports  |  Business  |  Politics  |  Opinion  |  Entertainment  |  Lifestyle  |  Travel  |  Blogs  |  Cars  |  Homes  |  Jobs  |  Classifieds/Shopping  

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Site Map | Advertise | Guide to The Bee | Bee Jobs | FAQs | RSS

Contact Us | e-edition | Subscribe | Manage Your Subscription | E-newsletters | Sacbeemail | Archives

sacbee.com | Sacramento.com | Capitol Alert | SacMomsClub.com | SacPaws.com | SacWineRegion.com

Copyright © The Sacramento Bee
2100 Q St.  P.O. Box 15779  Sacramento, CA 95816  (916) 321-1000