It was always going to be about the diamonds. They were, after all, at the center of the case.
But when Kim Kardashian arrived at a Paris court on Tuesday as the star witness in the trial of the “grandpa robbers” — the men accused of entering her luxury residence in the small hours of the morning in October 2016, tying her up and making off with over $9 million in jewels, including a $4 million diamond ring — what was less expected were the diamonds on her body.
To be specific: the $3 million, 52.17-carat necklace by Samer Halimeh she was wearing on her neck, the sparkling white gold and diamond pavé cuff by Briony Raymond on her ear, the rock on her finger and the twinkling anklet.
They stood out both against the severe black of her peplumed skirt suit, and in the environs of the courtroom, where the usual attire leans more toward generic business mufti and where conventional wisdom has it that discretion is the better part of strategy. At least when it comes to the sort of accessories that could potentially prejudice the opinions of a judge or jury.
If anyone understands the power of the image, however, it is Ms. Kardashian, who has built her career in part by selling her own visual drama — her body, booty and face. At the same time, she also understands the expectations of the law: She has lobbied for prison reform, passed the so-called baby bar in California and declared her intention to become a lawyer. Both of which would suggest that her decision to arrive in court bedecked in the sort of gems normally reserved for a black-tie evening event was a deliberate, if unconventional, choice.
Maybe the jewels were a statement of defiance in the face of the men who robbed her; a sign that, whatever they took, Ms. Kardashian has recouped the loss and then some. Maybe they were a symbol of her own return from fear to embrace an even brighter, more glamorous, future.
Maybe they were a covert reminder of what was at stake, and what had been stolen. A reminder that even the rich and powerful can be victimized.
Maybe they are part of her armor, much like the suit, which was nipped in the waist and padded through the shoulders; sharp and protective at the same time. Maybe they have a special meaning. On Mother’s Day, Ms. Kardashian had posted a gushing Instagram Story of an anklet that her daughter North had given her: a string of diamonds dotted by the birthstones of each of her four children, which appears to be the anklet she was wearing to the trial.
Maybe Ms. Kardashian knew that she was never going to fade into the background, or seem like a relatable person. That dressing like a librarian would have appeared inauthentic for someone so often in the spotlight, whose appearance was always going to generate attention and who has said she was there to speak her truth. Maybe as a result she decided to play up her celebrity, the better to convey why she might have seemed such a tempting target.
Indeed, news releases from the designers of both the necklace and the ear cuff suggested those pieces were chosen specifically for the occasion. Not long after Ms. Kardashian took the stand, the company that designed the necklace, Samer Halimeh New York, sent out a statement heralding the 80 diamonds in the piece, including a center pear-shaped gem of 10.13 carats. According to an email from the designer: “This natural diamond carries its pure, powerful energy straight from the mine. Kim is powerful herself, so it was an honor to dress her for this very important day in her life.” Briony Raymond, the ear cuff designer, likewise took credit for its sparkler, which was on loan, according to a spokeswoman.
Which also suggests another conclusion: Maybe even in a moment of utmost seriousness, the immutable law of the moment is to never let any photo opportunity go to waste.
Vanessa Friedman has been the fashion director and chief fashion critic for The Times since 2014.
The post The Case of Kim Kardashian’s Courtroom Diamonds appeared first on New York Times.
