Gwyneth Paltrow’s Subtle and Sophisticated Style During Ski Crash Trial
Gwyneth Paltrow is known for her impeccable sense of style, and she didn’t disappoint during her eight-day ski crash trial in Park City, Utah, in 2016. Every aspect of her behavior, attire, and statements was scrutinized, and the 50-year-old Oscar-winner went for an understated presence to impress the jury.
According to Cynthia Augello, partner at Warren Law Group, a litigant’s choice of clothing in court can unconsciously convey significant information about them. Augello further added that “Ms. Paltrow’s overall demeanor and unique aura leave an indelible impression on both the judge and the jury, and while her visage should not influence the outcome of the case, it undoubtedly plays a role in shaping perceptions.”
Paltrow’s clothing options were appropriate for the trial, aligning with the expectations of the local community, while maintaining an effortless appearance. Despite the underlying cost, each of her looks had a similar neutral palette, and she paired major designer labels with her own G. Label by Goop brand threads.
On the first day of the trial, Paltrow wore a $1,200 pair of brown leather Celine boots, a green trench coat, and a cream-colored sweater from The Row, along with aviator Ray-Ban sunglasses. On the second day, she walked into the courtroom wearing an ivory-colored cardigan from G. Label by Goop with a $25,000 gold Foundrae clip chain heart necklace. She also carried a vintage brown leather Celine purse.
On the third day, Paltrow wore a gray Brunello Cucinelli suit, and on the fourth day, she testified in Prada – a long navy skirt and a black, long-sleeved polo with Chelsea boots which retail for $1,320. For day five, she wore a $595 Goop black cardigan with a matching skirt and repeated her Celine boots on day six, but opted for Proenza Schouler White Label leather culottes for a cool $900. Paltrow also paired the look with her own pink G. Label blouse.
While Paltrow’s clothing options were undoubtedly expensive, every outfit maintained an understated elegance and neutrality that seemed designed to avoid distracting from the case at hand. As Paltrow’s attorney Andres Munoz, partner with Romano Law, noted, “Her choice of clothing and accessories may be to play to the local crowd or to underscore that she’s the ‘obviously famous defendant’ that is being subjected to a money grab by the plaintiff, but juries also have a keen ability to sniff out disingenuous behavior. So, the balance is to appeal to the jury by appearing more likable and relatable, while staying genuine.”
Criminal defense attorney Silva Megerditchian also noted that while jurors “see everything,” as long as the clothing is appropriate, it truly does not affect the verdict. “It is important to note when representing a celebrity, there is a difference between likability and credibility,” Megerditchian said. “Ms. Paltrow may not come off relatable or even likable, but most legal analysts would say her testimony was credible and in a trial, nothing is more important than the credibility and believability of the witness, regardless of what they are wearing or how expensive their jewelry is.”
In the end, Paltrow earned a legal victory when an eight-person jury found she was not liable for a ski crash collision involving Terry Sanderson at the Deer Valley Resort. She countersued and was awarded $1 in damages, in addition to attorney fees.
Conclusion
While Gwyneth Paltrow’s clothing choices for her eight-day ski crash trial in Park City, Utah, were undoubtedly expensive, they maintained an understated elegance and neutrality that seemed designed to avoid distracting from the case at hand. As a celebrity defendant, appearing more likable and relatable while still being genuine can be crucial in winning over the jury. Ultimately, Paltrow’s testimony was deemed credible, and she emerged victorious in the trial.
