Slashdot Mirror


Extreme Criminal Court Makeover

None of the jurors in John Ditullio's trial will get to see his swastika tattoo, the profanity written on his neck, or any of the other jail tattoos he's acquired thanks to his lawyer Bjorn Brunvand. Ditullio's attorney, successfully argued that the tattoos could be prejudicial to the jurors saying, "It’s easier to give someone who looks like you a fair shake.” The court agreed to a $125 court makeover before each session of his trial. From the article: "'There’s no doubt in my mind — without the makeup being used, there’s no way a jury could look at John and judge him fairly,' Mr. Brunvand said in an interview in his office here. 'It’s too frightening when you see him with the tattoos. It’s a scary picture.'”

2 of 14 comments (clear)

  1. It's part of the package by lancelotlink · · Score: 2

    No one forced him to get those tattoos and he's not looking to have them permanently removed. So I'd say they are part of him, part of his persona and should be shown to the jury.

    1. Re:It's part of the package by SleazyRidr · · Score: 2

      It's quite clear that getting a tattoo on your face/neck is shouting something about your personality to anyone who looks at you. Getting a tattoo on you chest/butt/somewhere else not so obvious may indicate that you have a wild side, but you have the discretion to put it away when it's not appropriate. A lack of discretion is something that may be of interest to a jury.