by Maria Teresa Veneziani
The actors in the defamation trial, which became a media event, use fashion to portray honesty and credibility
In the 1980s, the dress for success, off-the-shoulder blazers in bold colors, was coined for women seeking their role in society. Today, in the courtroom in Fairfax, Virginia, where Depp’s libel trial against Heard is ongoing, we witness something new: dress to propose. What? Honesty, seriousness, sincerity: clothes make the point, observes Vanessa Friedman, fashion director of the New York Times. When the excessive star clothes were over, both opponents challenged each other with suits: if not really stuffy, but precise, studied down to the last detail. 58-year-old pirate Depp has shed his silver skulls, rock star desert boots and gypsy king scarves; and trimmed the earrings, opting instead for a navy, gray and black three-piece suit, waistcoat always buttoned to perfection, tie on, a silk pocket square well-displayed. Accuracy that remains impressed because it is tasked with portraying the gentle soul of the dandy.
The role of imaging
Her hair is also neatly pulled back into a ponytail, as if to emphasize that she has nothing to hide: neither her eyes, nor her face, nor her truth. Not exactly a Wall Street official, but he seems close enough to the affluent middle class — Vanessa Friedman points out — and in a trial involving drug and alcohol abuse and related extreme behaviors, including physical violence, none Conicidence . Recognizing the role that image-making plays in human prejudice when it comes to right and wrong simply means acknowledging all the ways in which each party tries to get their arguments across. And then, on the other corner of the ring of justice, here she is, the star’s actress, ex-wife and accuser: Amber Heard, 36, in her sober attire that couldn’t be more sober. Speaking to The Washington Post in 2018, she identified herself as a victim of sexual abuse at the hands of her famous husband, which is why the latter sued her, seeking $50 million in damages, a legal move that sparked a court counterclaim by her, who claimed $100 million demanded damages and now has the task in the courtroom of overturning the image of an unstable personality conveyed to her by her ex-husband. Wear suits – pants or skirts that come down to mid-calf. Sober and never too designer looks, because the idea of the opportunist aimed at monetization is not nurtured. The makeup just mentioned, the little jewels, the hair tied in a bun, the white shirt buttoned down to the last button, often with ties, the waistcoat and blazer in classic and soft shades of gray and blue.
The dress influences the jury
Clothes, in which Heard doesn’t want to play the role of victim but rather the modern good girl who knows her worth but, according to the actor’s fans, is too like his fans not to make them believe she’s trolling him, fights on own soil. As the NYT points out, there’s a reason the Supreme Court in Estelle v. Williams wrote in 1976 that in accordance with the 14th Amendment, the state cannot compel an accused to be tried before a jury while wearing identifiable prison garb. The dress alone could have persuaded the jury to return a guilty verdict. The right to say what you want in court is part of the right to a fair trial, Friedman recalled. And since clothing can negatively affect perception, it can also work to the benefit of the individual. It allows you to continue to defend your position even when you are not in the stands; if you just sit still. In addition to the red carpet stylist, the court dress expert also has his say. Winona Ryder’s defensive looks have made fashion history: the actress attempted to steal a Marc Jacobs garment in 2002, had swept the covers with an elegant and demure appearance, and earned a campaign with the designer from whom she stole the goods . And now it’s up to the jury. of style.
May 22, 2022 (Modification May 22, 2022 | 11:31)
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED