Joel Mandel — Direct
165 linesTHE COURT: All right. Yes, ma'am Your next witness.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Your Honor, our next witness is Joel Mandel.
THE COURT: Again, Ms. Bredehoft. Thank you.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Your Honor, our next witness is Joel Mandel. He's also by deposition designation.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And we start the questioning.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you.
THE COURT: JOEL MANDEL, being first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
MS. BREDEHOFT: Would you please state your name and business address.
JOEL MANDEL: It's Joel Mandel. That's M-A-N-D-E-L. 8383 Wilshire Boulevard.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Now, Mr. Mandel, you are here under subpoena; is that correct, testifying under subpoena?
JOEL MANDEL: Correct.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Okay. Could you, please, describe a little bit about your educational background and work experience?
JOEL MANDEL: I graduated from Brown University in 1980. I graduated from the University of California Berkeley, school of law, in 1983. I went to work for a law firm in Century City from to '87, called Wyman, Bautzer, Rothman, Kuchel & Silbert. And I left in March of to form this company with my brother.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Could you, please, describe a little bit about your experience in the field of the business management, the types of clients represented, your reputation in Hollywood, business field. 1:
JOEL MANDEL: I'll cut to where we are today. You asked me a different question. We are a full - what I would describe as a full-service business management firm, which means we provide a wide array of financial, you know, administrative, advisory kinds of services. We pay bills and we do tax returns and we assist people with purchases of cars and boats and art and planes and, you know, we help people with outside professionals on estate planning matters and with brokers on house purchases and with contractors on renovations.
JOEL MANDEL: And so, it's a wide range of financial - primarily financial services, I financial and personal services that we provide to our clients.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And what types of clients are those?
JOEL MANDEL: The business, our business is primarily, p y entertainment. So I don't have a percentage, but, you know, my guess is it's probably something like 80 percent. But that means people that work in the entertainment business, broadly speaking.
MS. BREDEHOFT: How long have you been a business manager in LA?
JOEL MANDEL: Since 1987.
MS. BREDEHOFT: When did you first meet Mr. Depp?
JOEL MANDEL: In, I believe, 1999.
MS. BREDEHOFT: So, if you could take us, to make this a little -- run a little more smoothly, tell us what you provided in earlier time. If it changed over time, just kind of take me through it, if that's possible.
JOEL MANDEL: Well, let me do my best job. I would describe things, initially, as being the way I described our services generally. I mean, the broad range of things that we do for all of our folks, you know, we did for Mr. Depp, you know.
JOEL MANDEL: What changed was that reasonably early on, so within the first few years, his life and career exploded and such. And so, you know, as I said, our relationship started in '99. I think he did the first Pirates film in 2003. And so, you know, it had already his -- you know, he was on a very successful trajectory. The success of the Pirates films obviously catapulted into an different level of success. And that was a career thing; it was also a financial thing. So there was money made from the Pirates movie and all of a sudden, the, you know, what he was going to now make moving forward was going to be significantly greater. His life changed.
JOEL MANDEL: And so, what did that translate to? That translated into a variety of things. And I don't want to mix dates, it's a long stretch of time, but that meant a bigger life. It meant more employees. It meant buying additional real property. It meant buying additional personal property. It meant a bigger life, a more expensive life.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Can you, please, describe for me the day-to-day logistics of communicating with Mr. Depp related to your services. --.---5-9-38-+---.5940
JOEL MANDEL: Sure. So I'll explain this way: Early on, Mr. Depp had made it clear that, just as my initial introduction to him had been through his sister, that his sister was acting in, what I would call, a gatekeeper-like role. And that she was going to play an instrumental part of his life in interfacing with people like me, like his agents, like his lawyers.
JOEL MANDEL: And so, there was interface on a constant basis with Christi. It was the role that he sort of placed her in. The conversations and communications were constant and daily with Mr. Depp. They were when they needed to be. And so, we talked often. We met often. But not at the same kinds of frequency, you know, the daily kinds of frequency that I communicated with Christi.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Please describe the challenges presented in serving as the business manager for Mr. Depp?
JOEL MANDEL: Well, they changed over time. And so, the challenges going on were exciting challenges I 1 of somebody whose life and career were getting, you know, very big, very quickly. That's a professional challenge, but it was a lovely, wonderful professional challenge. That means someone's traveling a lot. Their, again, income and expense have grown dramatically. There's more staff. There are more real properties. There's more -- I mean, it just -- it exponentially grows, the size of the job. And that's what I did for a living. So that's, you know, all changes and challenges, but good changes and good challenges.
JOEL MANDEL: My sense of the challenge of this representation and my description of the challenge would change probably sometime around 2010. And I say that because it was a time after he had shot the film Rum Diaries and he had come back from that picture and what had always been slightly difficulty in arranging meetings became more difficulty What I had experienced as someone who liked to enjoy his wine at the end of the day became consumption that seemed excessive. And the ability to coordinate and find times when he would meet became more difficult and it became clear, over time, that there were issues with alcohol and drugs. And that translated into more erratic behavior, more stressful behavior, more time when it was difficult to engage in the kinds of conversations that I needed to do my job. And so, it became more of a challenge for a variety of reasons after 2010.
JOEL MANDEL: And quite frankly the other thing that happened - and this is '13/'14, you know, his meteoric sort of career rise had started to, you know - there were some pictures that were not well received. And for anybody in the business, whether you're an actor, you know, a director, I mean, you're frequently judged by your last picture, and there were a number of pictures in a row that were not successful. And so, there was a combination of events, what felt like professional pressures, what felt like some professional dissatisfaction.
JOEL MANDEL: 122 What I sense was likely strains in his '"relationship with Amber, his use of alcohol and
MS. BREDEHOFT: You indicated that you were having more drugs, made my job more challenging. difficulty arranging meetings. What, if any, role did increase use of alcohol and drugs have on your ability to be able to arrange and engage in meetings with Mr. Depp?
JOEL MANDEL: There were stretches of time when it appeared clear to me that the use of alcohol and drugs was a daily event. And so, there were, communicate directly with Mr. Depp. And, so, some obviously, various times when I needed to of my conversation with the people I've described involved finding good days and good parts of days when he and I could engage in conversations that he and I needed to engage in, where I knew that he would be clear-minded and sober.
MS. BREDEHOFT: So were there any periods that you can recall, between 2010 and the end of your relationship with Mr. Depp, that Mr. Depp had any periods of sobriety?
JOEL MANDEL: There were certainly stretches of time that he seemed better. There were days and weeks of - there were stretches of times when he was better. And I couldn't tell you dates, but there were stretches of time where he was better, and more often not.
MS. BREDEHOFT: As the business manager, you would have been responsible for paying Dr. Kipper's expenses; is that correct?
JOEL MANDEL: Corrected.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Can you recall, approximately, how much per year Mr. Depp spent on Dr. Kipper and his staff?
JOEL MANDEL: I think the fee was around a hundred thousand dollars a month.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Describe for me what you observed of Mr. Depp engaging in what you would call erratic behavior.
JOEL MANDEL: What I mean there are a variety of ways in which responses to things seemed disproportionate to the things. And so, you know, there were times when he would be upset about something, and he would be very, very, very upset ! about something. Seemingly, to me, Again, erratic is a funny word. You disproportionate to that something. know, I felt like things were less predictable. I iS felt like it, you know - I was - I guess, professionally in a place I never know, day to day, what to expect.
MS. BREDEHOFT: When you said Mr. Depp was -- sometimes his responses seemed to be disproportionate and that he would be very, very upset, what, if any, expressing anger? observations did you make about Mr. Depp
JOEL MANDEL: When he was angry at someone, he would let them know. And that - was that sent in my direction? Very rarely. But at times, you know, certainly on a handful of cases in 2013. But if he was upset about a contractor, he would vent. If he was upset with a security person, he would vent. He would, you know- he seemed to be increasingly less filtered and increasingly, you know, the notion of - I want to answer you accurately. You know, people moderate their behavior. They may moderate their behavior in public because things are, you know, inappropriate in a particular setting. People may be upset with an employee, but they're constrained in how the employee's chastised. My experience was Mr. Depp became increasingly less constrained, less concerned with whether he was going to upset someone's feeling, or just increasingly to comfortable venting in an aggressive way when he was disappointed or upset about something.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And did that increase over time beginning, I think you said, around 2010?
JOEL MANDEL: It began to change in -- in about 2010. And it increased over time and increased to the point where our relationship began to be impacted in 2015 and was eventually, obviously, severed in 2016.
MS. BREDEHOFT: When Mr. Depp would express his anger and upset, did he use profanity?
JOEL MANDEL: Sure.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Did you observe an increase in Mr. Depp's expressions of anger and upset associated with any increase in financial difficulties or having to discuss financial difficulties?
JOEL MANDEL: Yes. His financial circumstances in 2015 had reached a point where I was extremely concerned and had been -- was, on a very, very regular basis, expressing that concern. And it seemed, as I increased my level of expressing that concern, there was anger directed, you know, in my direction. And so, my warnings in 2015 that we were in very dire financial circumstances were not met very favorably.
MS. BREDEHOFT: So, did there come a time that you observed, as Mr. Depp's business manager, that his spending habits became more increased, perhaps excessive, extravagant?
JOEL MANDEL: Yes.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And when did you observe that? When did that begin?
JOEL MANDEL: Again, in the time frame I described, in that 2010 and on time frame income was very significant spending was very significant And, again, the spending level had grown very very very large and required that level of incredibly high income to be maintained when it dropped off the disconnect became untenable
MS. BREDEHOFT: And what, if anything, did you say or do to try to assist Mr. Depp in curbing that spending?
JOEL MANDEL: Those conversations were constant.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Were Nathan Holmes, Kevin Murphy, and Stephen Deuters part of the $300,000 a month full-time staff?
JOEL MANDEL: Yes.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Okay. Do you know, roughly, how much each of them were paid?
JOEL MANDEL: It's been a long time. If I had to guess, Kevin Murphy was probably paid about a quarter of a million dollars a year, and Stephen and Nathan, probably about $125,000 a year.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Do you know how much Jerry Judge was being paid by Mr. Depp as a security guard?
JOEL MANDEL: We paid Jerry by the day. I think !_2 Jerry made something like $10,000 a day.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Did Mr. Depp spend any money on charities?
JOEL MANDEL: Some. Not very much. I 6
MS. BREDEHOFT: And approximately how much?
JOEL MANDEL: No specific recollection. ,8
MS. BREDEHOFT: Less than 50,000?
JOEL MANDEL: I don't recall writing large charity checks. It was more his style to show up at an event or lend his name to something rather than write a check.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Mr. Mandel, did Mr. Depp ever acknowledge that he needed to change his spending patterns and improve the situation?
JOEL MANDEL: Yes. At various times, when we would have these conversations, he would acknowledge that he understood what was being communicated, and would make expressions of a commitment to do what was necessary.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And were there occasions that Mr. Depp would apologize and say he's going to do better?
JOEL MANDEL: That happened on occasion, yes.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And what, if any, observations did you I make about whether Mr. Depp ultimately did improve and work with you to try to get his spending under is control?
JOEL MANDEL: That never seemed to happen. And so, there would be, at times, expressions of appreciation, expressions of an understanding, expressions of a willingness to do what was necessary. But there never seemed to be any follow-through when the things would be, you know, teed up that had to happen to make those words real. There was no follow-through.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Let's talk about the tax returns for a moment. Did you -- you and TMJ -- TMG file tax returns for Mr. Depp on his company's behalf while you were his business manager?
JOEL MANDEL: Yes.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Are you aware that Mr. Depp testified, under oath, that you did not file his tax returns for 17 years?
JOEL MANDEL: I'm aware of what you're telling me.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Is it true that you did not file his tax returns or those on behalf of his company for 17 years?
JOEL MANDEL: No, that's not true.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Were there times that you were unable to pay some, or all, of Mr. Depp's taxes on time?
MS. BREDEHOFT: What is your understanding of what all his numerous other vices meant?
JOEL MANDEL: The use of alcohol and drugs.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Do you know how much Mr. Depp spent on prescription drugs during the time that you were his business manager?
JOEL MANDEL: There were periods of time when his prescription spending was, from just my experience, very high, thousands of dollars a month, but I can't tell you the time periods.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Do you have a recollection of whether TMG had to pay for property damage at other rental properties or hotel properties that Mr. Depp used because of damage to the property?
JOEL MANDEL: Specifics, no. But did we pay damages 9 5 0 Absolutely, yes. 5_9_5_0 at various times over the years?
MS. BREDEHOFT: And do you recall that Mr. Depp, from time to time, did commit property damage in the rentals that he was in, or hotels?
MS. BREDEHOFT: And you recall there were times you did have to pay for damages to Mr. Depp's rentals; is that correct, the hotels?
JOEL MANDEL: There were times.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Okay. Now you had testified a little bit earlier about needing 25 million by the end of the year. Are you aware of whether Mr. Depp was able to sign on for movies and obtain 25 million by the end of the year without the assistance of a lending entity?
MS. BREDEHOFT: So, the first time that -- that your -- that you, as a business manager, were unable to pay Mr. Depp's taxes by October 15, was October 15, 2015; is that correct?
JOEL MANDEL: Correct.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And you considered that to be an increasingly difficult and alarming situation that you were trying to resolve into late January 2016. I is that correct? 2
JOEL MANDEL: That's correct.
MS. BREDEHOFT: I showed you earlier Exhibit Number 8, which was the video clip of Mr. Depp slamming doors and pouring wine, et cetera, in the kitchen. Do you recall that video?
JOEL MANDEL: I recall that video, yes.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Do you have a recollection of giving I Mr. Depp very bad news around February 10, 2016?
JOEL MANDEL: Again, I don't recall a specific meeting with a specific date. As I've indicated, there were a variety of meetings in groups and conversations with alone, and in groups, regarding how far -you know, how these very dire financial circumstances were going to be addressed. And as I've indicated, the tone of these conversations became more tense as time went on, and these issues were not being addressed.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And is it fair to say, in the first half of February of 2016, the conversations that you have just described were taking place?
JOEL MANDEL: I'll answer you more specifically. I called Mr. Depp and I began having conversations that took on a more heated tone in July of '15, when it became clear that he was not willing to sell the property in the South of France. And the tone of those conversations became more heated and more contentious as time went on because the circumstances were more dire.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And would it be fair to say that your perception was that the circumstances continued to become more dire between July 2015 up through the time of your termination in March 2016?
JOEL MANDEL: It did.
MS. BREDEHOFT: How did you learn of TMG's termination?
JOEL MANDEL: Edward White had a colleague, an employee, a CPA, someone in his office came into our office and physically hand-delivered a letter.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And who was the letter from?
JOEL MANDEL: I think they were - they hand-delivered, like, one letter on the 15th and one on the 16th. So there was a letter signed by Mr. Depp indicating that our services had been terminated and a letter from Edward White's office, I recall, saying that they were the new people and we should coordinate a transition.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Did you have any familiarity with Edward White at the time of the termination?
JOEL MANDEL: I had not heard of him.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And did Mr. White accept your offers of assistance?
JOEL MANDEL: For the most part, no.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Now, approximately how much did Mr. Depp earn during the period of time you represented him?
JOEL MANDEL: I recall the amount being reported to be something like $600 million, and I believe that was probably, you know, close to that.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Did you and your brother steal $650 million from Mr. Depp?
JOEL MANDEL: No.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Did you steal anything from Mr. Depp?
JOEL MANDEL: No.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Mr. Mandel did TMG or you take any money, other than the fees that you were entitled to, from Mr. Depp?
JOEL MANDEL: No.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Mr. Mandel, were you ever found adjudicated, by any court, any kind of legal entity, any agency, to have committed malpractice, malfeasance, or embezzlement?
JOEL MANDEL: No.
THE COURT: All right. Why don't we go ahead and take our morning recess at this point. Ladies and gentlemen, let's take our morning O recess. Do not discuss the case and do not do any outside research, okay? Thank you.
THE COURT: Again, court is still in session, if we could -- court is still in session. Thank you. Thank you.
THE COURT: All right. We'll go ahead and take a recess until 11: 15. Is that all right?
THE COURT: All right. Court is in recess.
COURT BAILIFF: All rise.
COURT BAILIFF: All rise. Is Please be seated and come to order.
THE COURT: All right. Are we ready for the jury?
MR. MONIZ: Your Honor, may I.
THE COURT: Okay. Do you want to I approach?
THE COURT: All right. Yes.
MR. MONIZ: Your Honor, this relates to exhibits for Mr. Waldman.
THE COURT: Okay. What did you do to your finger? Maybe I don't want to know.
MR. MONIZ: Like a complete idiot, I bumped into a wall.
MS. BREDEHOFT: He ran into Mr. Depp.
THE COURT: You're trying to show something here. I don't think that's --
THE COURT: I noticed that.
MR. MONIZ: Ironic.
THE COURT: Yes, ironic. Yes, sir.
MR. MONIZ: This relates to the counterclaim statements that are coming through Mr. Waldman. Your Honor's already ruled on this, to some extent, with Ms. Heard, and I understand Is we don't go back.
THE COURT: Don't go backwards, but you can preserve the record.
MR. MONIZ: So, we would move into evidence, move for the admission of 881A, 881B, and 881C, and those are the articles that contain the counterclaim statements.
THE COURT: Right.
MR. MONIZ: I appreciate Your Honor has already ruled that this is hearsay, just want to touch, very briefly, on a couple of our --
THE COURT: You can, just for the record, because, obviously, I mean ...
MR. MONIZ: I understand we don't go back.
THE COURT: But defamatory statements can be in context to your own statements, but he didn't know what the articles were going to say or how they were going to print in the article.
MR. MONIZ: Right. It is relevant to a couple of points. First of all, it is relevant to show that he was speaking to reporters; that's who the statements were made to. The reporter, then, went on to write articles that presented both sides of the story and present his statements as the statement of one side of a two-sided story. So that, we believe, is evidence the reporters were knowledgeable of the circumstances and did not accept things at face value.
MR. MONIZ: The other point I would like to make, Your Honor, is it is relevant to the damages that these two statements are buried at the bottom of lengthy articles. The articles have all sorts of bad things about both parties. We believe it goes to the plausibility that Ms. Heard claims she suffered $100 million in damages from these specific statements. These are statements that appear in the context of articles that lay out all sorts of other things about the parties. We believe that's relevant to the damages issue, and the jury ought to be able to consider the way these statements actually appear in context in assessing her claim that she suffered $100 million in damages from these statements from Mr. Waldman.
THE COURT: You're saying there are other bad statements in there for damages purposes of hers, for her?
MR. MONIZ: You have Ms. Heard's lawyers -- for her, yeah, I mean, yeah, they talk about -- I mean, I have copies of the articles here if Your Honor wants to look at them or not. They lay out, there are transcripts of specific, for example, recordings, you know, articles. The articles talk about how she admitted to punching and so on.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. BREDEHOFT: Same arguments as to before. He had no idea what was going to be placed in there at the time, so that's not pertinent to it.
MS. BREDEHOFT: And the second thing, Your Honor has b ruled consistently and, also, against us. We can't put in other articles that are negative or other statements that are made negative about Amber Heard. We can bring them up and put titles in front of them, but --
THE COURT: Which was done in cross-examination.
MR. MONIZ: Thank you, Your Honor.