When Shakira arrived this morning at the Provincial Court of Barcelona to testify before the judge for allegedly having defrauded 14.5 million euros corresponding to income and wealth taxes during the years 2012 and 2014, she knew perfectly well that dozens of cameras would be on her. expecting. Also that public scrutiny would not only be on her words, her statement or her interactions with the judge, but also on her attitude, her expressions and, above all, her clothing.
That the clothing that a woman chooses to attend a court date is a whole genre is not only demonstrated by the countless cases in which that clothing, unfortunately, has influenced the verdict. In 2004, a judge in Barcelona considered that the testimony of an alleged victim of abuse was not credible because she “dressed in fashion” and did not fit the “victim profile.” The magistrate acquitted a man accused of continuous attacks because his wife’s story did not coincide with “the fear and mistrust of the typical abused woman” and because the complainant had attended the three days of the trial “dressed differently every day, with rings , bracelets and curious earrings, large-sized glasses. Factors that, according to the judge, did not coincide “with the vision of a woman who has spent six months subjected to attacks.” A few months ago, the Pack’s lawyer also questioned the credibility of the San Fermines survivor and defended including in the trial summary a photo of the young woman on her personal Instagram wearing a T-shirt with the motto Whatever you do, take off your clothes. panties. The phrase was a catchphrase reality Super Shore television.
In the case of the trial against Shakira, in which a crime against the Public Treasury is being prosecuted, gender-biased prejudices related to clothing are obviously not as important, which does not mean that they are not equally present.
The Colombian singer, who has been in Spain for several days now, as she performed at the Latin Grammy gala last Thursday in Seville, appeared in public discreetly smiling, sending a kiss to all those who were waiting for her, among whom there was a large group of fans and also put his hand over his heart, in a clear gesture of gratitude. Nothing seemed left to improvisation but much less her look, in which each element was a very specific pale pink. On the one hand, her suit was made up of a blazer with a single button and wide lapels and pleated trousers with buckles and an ironed stripe. On the other hand, a V-neck t-shirt in exactly the same tone. Then, three accessories: some translucent vinyl pink sunglasses, some platforms and finally a long-handled bag. The latter was the only one whose brand was perfectly recognizable: it belongs to the French brand Jacquemus famous, among other things, precisely for its viral bags.
The other brands to which the garments belong have not made public the artist’s choice, as they have done on other occasions. No serious brand wants to advertise in a judicial dispute. Although a trial can be an unparalleled global projection platform, as Gwyneth Paltrow demonstrated last year. The actress was the absolute star of the Park City courthouse, in Utah, for eight days, where she starred in the Sanderson v. Paltrow, in which she was tried for being involved in a skiing accident in 2016 at the Deer Valley Resort. The trial was double: all appearances of her displaying winter style-Succession-silent luxury were analyzed and turned into a meme. And all the brands he wore carefully listed: coats from The Rox, suits from Brunello Cucinelli and cardigans from his own brand, G. Label. Utah law advises “appropriate” dress and accepts casual attire.
Spanish law does not have a dress code: Lola Flores sat before the court dressed in black nappa leather and heels and Isabel Pantoja wrapped in shawls. Shakira, dressed in pink, has accepted three years in prison and a fine of 7.3 million in exchange for not going to prison.
#Dressed #pink #Shakira #impeccable #visual #history #famous #trials