Gwyneth Paltrow – The Fashionable Litigant
Gwyneth Paltrow has recently been in the news for her eight days of testimony in the Park City, Utah, ski crash trial stemming from an alleged collision in 2016. While the trial verdict is important news, what caught the attention of many was her subtle, yet sophisticated sense of style in the courtroom.
The 50-year-old Oscar-winner showed off her fashion sense by pairing major designer labels with her own G. Label by Goop brand threads, some of which sold out in minutes online upon being featured in court. Cynthia Augello, partner at Warren Law Group, told Fox News Digital that “every aspect of her behavior, attire and statements will be scrutinized.”
So it comes as no surprise that Paltrow went for an understated presence to impress the jury. “A litigant’s choice of clothing in court can unconsciously convey significant information about them, whether it is accurate or not. 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,” Augello said.
Gwyneth Paltrow wore a wide range of fashionable outfits for her eight-day ski crash trial.
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.
“Gwyneth Paltrow has chosen an appropriate wardrobe for her trial, opting for attire that aligns with the expectations of the local community, while maintaining an effortless appearance,” Augello said. “Despite the likelihood of her clothing being costly, it is a widely accepted notion that her wardrobe would be expensive.”
Costly is an understatement for a few of Gwyneth’s getups. On the first day of trial, Paltrow wore a $1,200 pair of brown leather Celine boots, a green trench coat and cream-colored sweater from The Row, and aviator Ray-Ban sunglasses.
On the second day of proceedings, 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.
“If Ms. Paltrow were to dress down, it could create an impression of attempting to deceive the jury, which is generally not well-received. By appearing approachable and relatable, she doesn’t give the impression that she thinks of herself as more important than the jury,” Augello said.
Despite the underlying cost, each of her looks had a similar neutral palette. She wore a gray Brunello Cucinelli suit on the third day. Gwyneth has worked with the coveted Italian designer in the past and wore the exact same suit to go shopping with her daughter, Apple, in November.
Paltrow made a conscious effort to choose her attire. “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,” Attorney Andres Munoz, partner with Romano Law, stated.
“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. Juries often penalize disingenuous behavior with an instant loss of credibility and likability. She can’t deny her own profile, so dressing down could hurt her in the end.”
On the fourth day, Gwyneth testified in Prada. She wore a long navy skirt and a black, long-sleeved polo with Chelsea boots which retail for $1,320. She told the jury that day that she lost “half a day of skiing” and was not friends with Taylor Swift despite knowing the symbolic meaning behind her own $1 countersuit.
The “Blank Space” singer won a sexual assault trial in 2017 against a former radio DJ who initially sued Swift after he claimed he was wrongfully terminated from his job after an incident at a meet-and-greet with Swift in 2013. She claimed he grabbed her inappropriately and counter-sued for battery and sexual assault, seeking $1 in damages.
“A party’s main goal at any trial is to win over the jury with a more persuasive, credible story,” Munoz said. “That can be done explicitly with testimony and evidence, and implicitly with unspoken actions to be more likable and appear credible. Paltrow’s appearance during this trial is an unspoken tool of persuasion that absolutely falls within that latter category.
Juries are unpredictable, especially with strategies that may appear disingenuous. So even though she’s going for a certain ‘look,’ you never know how the jury will actually interpret it. Sometimes it can backfire.”
On verdict day, Gwyneth Paltrow wore a Ralph Lauren top with a blue blazer from the designer label.
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,” Criminal defense attorney Silva Megerditchian said. “As we saw in the Johnny Depp trial, Mr. Depp came off extremely likable and relatable. 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.”
Conclusion
Throughout the trial, Gwyneth Paltrow proved that fashion and function can go hand in hand, with her attire showcasing her fashion sense while aligning with the expectations of the local community. Her fashion choices had a neutral palette, with her attires having designer labels while maintaining an understated and approachable appearance. Paltrow’s fashion and her presence’s overall demeanor reflect the unspoken tool of persuasion that appears to have played a key role in her winning the court case.
