A juror in Gwyneth Paltrow’s ski trial is speaking out on an ABC News exclusive for the first time after sidening with the A-list actress on Thursday.
A jury unanimously sided with the actor and Goop CEO, concluding that Paltrow was not at fault in the 2016 Utah ski resort confrontation between her and former optometrist Terry Sanderson. .
Samantha Imrie was jury number 11 in this trial.
“The whole thing was a little shocking to me,” the 31-year-old told ABC News.
Imrie changed his mind multiple times as the trial progressed, but it took only a few hours to reach the same decision after an eight-man juror began deliberating.
She said she found Paltrow’s testimony persuasive.
“In the back of my mind, yes, this woman was an actress, and I took that into account, but I didn’t think she had any reason to lie under oath.” is always in the spotlight, so you have to be honest all the time.”
MORE: Jurors side with Gwyneth Paltrow in ski accident trial
As for Sanderson, Imry said, “He was telling his truth, and unfortunately I think some of it was distorted by other factors, but he was telling a truth that wasn’t his. I don’t think it was intended.”
Ultimately, Imrie said she felt expert witnesses like Dr. Irving Shah, who testified on Paltrow’s behalf, helped her come to a conclusion.
“He’s an expert in snow sports in many ways. I think the fact that Dr. Cher was able to speak in a noisy environment and studied the science of snow in particular made him a stronger opinion.” said Imrie.
She said social media photos of Sanderson traveling around the world following the 2016 accident didn’t help the case either. was claiming.
I think I wrote down, “I need to make more money to travel this way.” You wouldn’t have thought he could do those things based on the paintings that were drawn. “
MORE: Terry Sanderson, who sued Gwyneth Paltrow in 2016 skiing accident, testifies in civil court
The high-profile case involved celebrity Paltrow, but Imrie said her training as a nurse helped her focus on the facts of the case rather than who was involved.
“I think it’s important that the public doesn’t think this was a win just because Gwyneth is a celebrity. I mean, this is evidence-based. This is law-based,” she said. I work in medicine and I have to see everyone the same way, and I think that applies to the courts as well.”
Sanderson had requested $300,000 in damages, but instead had to pay Paltrow $1 in “symbolic damages” and pay her attorney’s fees and expenses.