Dressing too well?

You should send the juror a Thank You card for his consulting advice. People pay large sums of $$ for good advice such as you received.

Sorry to hear you feel the outcome of your hard work was affected by your clothing.

This is something I have encountered many times in my life, but only recently am I beginning to figure out how to work with it.

One of the activities I do is playing music. This has taken me into many places, everywhere from the seediest bars to some of the most exclusive private clubs in the US. I've played for celebrity weddings, and for parties where half the people attending have last names that are highly recognizable US brand names.

After years of being shown to the back door by doormen and being treated disdainfully by wealthy clients, I started to discover that they were usually discriminating against me based on my clothing. I decided to do research and try to wear the appropriate clothes for each occasion.

Here's one example:

After reading Manton's essay on "proper" wedding attire, I decided to follow it to the letter everytime I play at rich people's fancy wedding cermonies. Now I don't go as far as a wearing a morning coat and balmoral boots, but I wear a navy suit, and "wedding" tie and black punch caps, etc.

After getting the uniform straight, I noticed a profound difference. The singers, rabbis, priests and ministers I work with don't complain anymore, the clients don't complain anymore. I don't get sent to the back door, in fact I haven't had any complaints since I started wearing the uniform over a year ago. No one has ever commented about my outfit which usually consists of bespoke and MTM suits and Charvet ties. And yes, a white French cuff shirt is fine at weddings.

This got me realizing that there is a "correct" outfit for every activity.

For something like a court appearance, job interview, business presentation I came up with the list of appropriate clothes.

This is a revised old post separating clothing into three categories:

CLOTHES THAT WILL OFFEND NO ONE

CLOTHES THAT MAY POSSIBLY OFFEND SOME

CLOTHES THAT WILL LIKELY OFFEND

I think my list might apply to how a jury might react to a Lawyer, or a defendent, for that matter.


1)CLOTHES THAT WILL OFFEND NO ONE:
Dark solid gray single breasted suit
Dark solid navy single breasted suit
Black Oxford shoes with leather soles (a little bit of brogueing is acceptable)
Dark socks that match the suit
Medium width tie in burgundy, medium or dark blue or possibly yellow.
White barrel cuff dress shirt
Plain belt that matches shoes

2)CLOTHES THAT MAY POSSIBLY ANNOY SOME
Brown Suits
Light colored suits
Black Suits
Suits with bold stripes
Double breasted suits
Sport coats or navy blazers with odd trousers
Patterned or brightly colored socks
Pinned collars
Tie Bars


Dark brown oxfords
Shoes with lots of brogueing
Pocket Squares (there is a big difference, though between a barely visible TV fold linen square and a big puff folded silk square in a bright color.)
Visible suspenders
Patterned shirts and shirts in colors other than white and medium blue.
Shirts with French cuffs
Ties in colors such as purple, green, orange, bright red, pink and brown.
Printed ties with large patterens.

3)CLOTHES THAT WILL LIKELY OFFEND
Jeans
Open collared shirt with no tie
Sneakers and sport shoes
Slip on shoes (even if they are Edward Green or Gucci slips-ons, loafers look too casual for business in IMHO)
Ties with tacky designs
Very skinny ties
Ascots
Rubber soled shoes
Shoes in colors other than dark brown or black

This list is by no means complete, but it calls upon you to answer the questions:
Who is my audience?
How much of each category do I want to include in my outfit?

Originally Posted by leftover_salmon

Click to expand...

Maybe you can move for a mistrial or appeal after the juror admitted that he was swayed by your clothing and not the facts of the case?

^ = Not a lawyer.

Oh if it only worked like that...

Honestly, I think your clothing does seem a little off putting. I'm not sure in what part of the country you tried the case, but your clothing certainly comes off as "big city" lawyer.

I'm not a lawyer, but I probably wouldn't wear french cuffs at least on the opening day and during jury selection. Having served on a few juries, it's unlikely to see anyone who wears french cuffs on a regular basis. You would want the jury to identify with you and not be put off by your attire.

And on the second day, you hit them with a three piece suit? At this point, they're still getting to know you and you're coming off as some stuffy lawyer. I'd probably save the three piece suit for later in the trial, if you wear it at all. If you do wear it, maybe you could make some off-the-cuff comment that can be accidentally overheard by the jury about how you had to pull this out of your closet because the trial is lasting so long.

Also - I agree with the other poster who said to drop the contrast collar shirts. I don't personally have a problem with them, but a good friend of mine who I just went through B-school with absolutely hated them.

We had a marketing professor who would show up in contrast collars and I have never seen a more extreme reaction from my friend. He considered them to be "Gordon Gekko" style and claimed that they made the wearer just look dishonest.

As a joke, for the final presentation we did for the class, I wore a pink/white BB contrast collar with french cuffs just to annoy my friend.

Anyhow - in your case, you want the jury to identify with you and not see you as some big-city, slick lawyer. As others have implied, you many want to dress down for future trials, depending on the setting.

It's kind of like the stockbroker I knew who drove a beat-up pickup truck when visiting his clients (working class, blue collar) but drove his Mercedes on the weekends.

Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba

Click to expand...

Dont take one mans opinion too much to heart.

sorry, I don't agree. take it to heart.

you worked hard for a long time to prepare for this trial. your personal taste and preference may have lost it for you. I hate to be cruel, or to rub it in, and, my personal feeling is that you were dressed well and in a manner that I would aprectiate - but the fact is that your personal preference for nice clothing may have hurt your career and your responsibility to your emplyer (in this case it seems like your emplyer is the people).

your reposnibility to your employer is to dress in the way that will allow you to succeed best in your work. as a peerson who needs to influence people, your dress will play an important place in your career and in how you do your job. you can't dress the way you want to and do your job in the best possible way.

so, either change your job, or work to figure out what is the most effective way to dress to execute your job, and do so.

I agree about the point that it is very important to know your audience and dress accordingly. I sometimes have trouble with this and can understand where you are coming from. Fortunately, right now I can dress pretty much however I want to!

Coming in looking too pretty can be interpreted as a wolve dressed in sheeps clothing. But more likely then not, it was jealousy more so then "being distracted". If anything he was distracted by the thought of how much better your life is then his.

I would think this would apply more so for a defense lawyer. The prosecutor is seen as the guy fighting for truth and what is right while the evil defense lawyer with his slicked backed hair would sell his soul to the devil to help get his guilty client off. At least thats what happens in the movies (remember blue collar people sometimes forgot "law and order" is just a tv show)

Originally Posted by modagg

Click to expand...

I would think this would apply more so for a defense lawyer. The prosecutor is seen as the guy fighting for truth and what is right while the evil defense lawyer with his slicked backed hair would sell his soul to the devil to help get his guilty client off. At least thats what happens in the movies (remember blue collar people sometimes forgot "law and order" is just a tv show)


I agree. I would look at the prosecuting attorney as being the champion and expect him to be in a Suit of Armor, or at least a very nice suit.

Oh by the way...Gregory Peck/ Atticus Finch: Three-piece suits!

You blew it, dude. And all for some french cuffs. :\\

Cruiser was on your Jury!?

Originally Posted by MrDaniels

Click to expand...

Oh by the way...Gregory Peck/ Atticus Finch: Three-piece suits!

Sure, in 1962.

Originally Posted by repressedm

Click to expand...

You blew it, dude. And all for some french cuffs. :\\

But lawyers on TV and the movies wear French Cuffs all the time!

Honest to God...If I am on a jury I expect that a successful lawyer is going to be well dressed! Ever seen Sleepers? Brad Pitt all natty in three-piece suits vs Dustin Hoffamn looking like he dug old suits out of a charity bin at the Salvation Army:

Originally Posted by tlmusic

Click to expand...

Sorry to hear you feel the outcome of your hard work was affected by your clothing. This is something I have encountered many times in my life, but only recently am I beginning to figure out how to work with it. One of the activities I do is playing music. This has taken me into many places, everywhere from the seediest bars to some of the most exclusive private clubs in the US. I've played for celebrity weddings, and for parties where half the people attending have last names that are highly recognizable US brand names. After years of being shown to the back door by doormen and being treated disdainfully by wealthy clients, I started to discover that they were usually discriminating against me based on my clothing. I decided to do research and try to wear the appropriate clothes for each occasion. Here's one example: After reading Manton's essay on "proper" wedding attire, I decided to follow it to the letter everytime I play at rich people's fancy wedding cermonies. Now I don't go as far as a wearing a morning coat and balmoral boots, but I wear a navy suit, and "wedding" tie and black punch caps, etc. After getting the uniform straight, I noticed a profound difference. The singers, rabbis, priests and ministers I work with don't complain anymore, the clients don't complain anymore. I don't get sent to the back door, in fact I haven't had any complaints since I started wearing the uniform over a year ago. No one has ever commented about my outfit which usually consists of bespoke and MTM suits and Charvet ties. And yes, a white French cuff shirt is fine at weddings. This got me realizing that there is a "correct" outfit for every activity.
I think that just about sums it up perfectly. It is far more a question about finding the right "uniform" for the audience than about dressing well being a bad thing. I think a lawyer defending a client who isn't wealthy would be able to get away with dressing up more than the prosecution in the same trial. It would be different again if the prosecution were fighting to obtain financial renumeration from some Big Nasty Corporation that had wronged working class people - in which case, you could just about pull out your morning coat. Politicians are also in the same boat as the prosecution where the defendant is working class. There is a language of dress. The truest feature of a fine dresser is his degree of fluency in the language of dress, so he able to say what he wishes depending on the situation. The OP's experience suggests NOT that he should fall forever silent, but that he should learn from the experience to refine his unspoken sartorial statements.

As always, I believe there is more to this story than what was originally said.

1. We don't know what the OP looks like. Some people just look like they're trying to give you a run for your money. Clothes are just clothes, it DOES matter who is wearing something. Some people look nerdy in a 3 piece, some look elegant, some look sophisticated, some look old and some might look like try hards (etc).

2. We don't know how the OP speaks and how he conducts his cases. The clothes might just "affirm one's suspicions." But something has to get you started down that path.

3. I just don't buy it. Sorry, fat chance that some guy is sitting there ignoring everything you say because you're wearing a pocket square and cufflinks. OP claimed this case was being prepared for 7 years? So obviously it wasn't something trivial like a parking violation. It just seems too far fetched and usually I'm on the side of "overdressing = douchebag behaviour."

4. I believe the OP's personality came through in his first post.

Day 1 (jury selection, opening statements, some witnesses): White french cuff shirt from Brooks Brothers, grey pinstripe Hickey Freeman 'Madison', and a solid medium blue necktie.

Day 2: (More witnesses): Light blue contrast coller french cuff shirt from Ben Silver, three-piece navy pinstriped suit suit from RLPL (vintage), and a red necktie with a subdued white paisely print necktie from JoS A. Bank.

Day 3: (More witnesses): White french cuff shirt with blue/grey stripes from Armani Collezioni, brown nailhead suit from Paul Stuart, and a grey necktie with white pencil stripes.

Day 4: (More witnesses): French blue button cuff shirt from Ben Silver, charcoal grey suit from the JoS A. Bank Signature Gold collection, and a black necktie with french blue dots (small but noticable) from Ralph Lauren Chaps.

Day 5: (Final witnesses, closing arguments and jury deliberation): Bespoke white french cuff shirt from Turnbull and Asser, navy suit from Brooks Brothers Golden Fleece, and a red necktie with navy blue pencil stripes from Brooks Brothers.

Day 6: (jury deliberation and verdict): Ecru button-cuff shirt from JoS. A Bank, tan suit from Ben Silver, and a medium and light blue alternating dot tie with a tan box pattern around each dot from Bill Blass.

Click to expand...

This is odd way to present what you were wearing in this context. The juror was supposedly distracted by a mere pocket square and cufflinks, yet here we are being given a highly detailed recount of the OP's wardrobe.

Honestly, something is telling me that the OP may be a little stuck up and it most likely shows. I fully expect a rundown on items in the WAYWT thread, but the OP went out of his way to tell us the makers of each piece, when those details are 100% arbitrary.

Instead of mentioning:

Day 4: (More witnesses): French blue button cuff shirt from Ben Silver, charcoal grey suit from the JoS A. Bank Signature Gold collection, and a black necktie with french blue dots (small but noticable) from Ralph Lauren Chaps.

Click to expand...

Why not just say, "French blue shirt, charcoal suit and black tie with blue dots. (and of course he was wearing black shoes on this day)"
There is an inherent level of pretentiousness here that I feel was the true culprit of the juror's feelings. And perhaps the juror just associated the entire "vibe" he was getting from the OP with the clothing.

Originally Posted by celery

Click to expand...

Honestly, something is telling me that the OP may be a little stuck up and it most likely shows.

Instead of mentioning:

Why not just say, "French blue shirt, charcoal suit and black tie with blue dots. (and of course he was wearing black shoes on this day)"
There is an inherent level of pretentiousness here that I feel was the true culprit of the juror's feelings. And perhaps the juror just associated the entire "vibe" he was getting from the OP with the clothing.

Who knows, there are probably people saying the same thing about me behind my back too and Celery too. In fact, of just about anyone who posts regularly here. But I think, the OP has been open enough to share his experiences with us here. I think responding to the OP with a kick in the teeth and a personal put down is both unhelpful and unfair.