Many sports “autobiographies” aren’t solely written by the athletes themselves. This can happen with a disclosed ‘with’ or ‘as told to’ by a sportswriter, or sometimes even without credit from ghostwriters. It’s particularly unusual when an athlete’s lawyer is accused of editing a book to alter the narrative significantly in support of a civil case—such is the situation with Charles Oakley.
In 2017, Oakley became embroiled in a controversial incident at Madison Square Garden during a New York Knicks game, leading to his arrest on misdemeanor charges of assault and trespass. Following the event, stark disagreements emerged between Oakley’s and the Knicks’ accounts of what transpired. The Knicks’ PR team branded his account as “pure fiction,” while team owner James Dolan suggested Oakley struggled with alcoholism. Eventually, the Knicks terminated their security chief following this incident.
Oakley proceeded to strike a plea deal that imposed a six-month ban from the Garden. Subsequently, he filed a civil suit against Dolan and MSG in late 2017. Although the suit has been dismissed twice, an appeals court allowed it to move forward last May.
However, MSG is fiercely contesting Oakley’s allegations. According to David Propper of The New York Post, their latest filing claims that Oakley’s attorney, Douglas Wigdor, made significant edits to Oakley’s 2022 autobiography The Last Enforcer (credited as “with Frank Isola”) to “fundamentally” alter Oakley’s portrayal of the 2017 incident, likely to bolster his civil case. Here’s a breakdown from Propper:
In one passage, Oakley admitted to initiating the physical confrontation with security, asserting that he “never should have touched” them. However, Wigdor rephrased this to suggest that security started grabbing Oakley, compelling him to defend himself, according to MSG lawyers.
In another version, Oakley stated he slipped when getting up from his seat, but Wigdor modified it to assert that the former NBA star was “pushed down by Dolan’s guys,” per the court documents.
Additionally, Oakley noted that he “was asked to leave,” albeit uncertain by whom, while Wigdor’s revision claimed he was “ordered to leave” by Dolan according to the court filing.
“These were not minor edits at the margins,” MSG lawyers asserted. “Wigdor edited the final version to tell a fundamentally different story from the truth reflected in each and every one of the earlier drafts of Oakley’s autobiography – a truth that would have been fatal to Oakley’s litigation position.”
Wigdor, in response, told Propper that the book is accurate, stating, “The final version of the book is consistent with Oakley’s testimony as well as the evidence, and we are confident that a jury will agree.”
This situation raises complex issues. While books differ greatly from court testimony, written perspectives in books, articles, and emails can be pivotal in court and influence public perception. Regardless of the outcome for MSG in this litigation, their claims prompt questions regarding public interpretation of the Oakley incident. Furthermore, Isola’s involvement in the book, amidst his work with ESPN and SiriusXM, raises additional curiosity around his potential knowledge of these alleged edits.
Pre-publication edits are far from uncommon; they happen frequently in media organizations. In book publishing, beyond the credited authors, there are often editors and fact-checkers involved. It’s also common for plaintiffs in various court cases to consult their attorneys prior to testifying. However, MSG’s assertion about Wigdor’s edits suggests a notably different narrative than the initial drafts presented. This autobiography gained considerable attention, featuring highlights from Oakley’s perspective on the MSG altercation, which played a significant role in the book’s overall reception. Observers will be keen to see if further developments emerge from this situation.
