BOSTON — Aaron Hernandez’s tattoos aren’t the first to be used as evidence in a murder trial. Body art has played a role in a surprising number of criminal cases nationwide, though legal experts concede that tattoos by themselves are rarely a deciding factor in convictions.
A Massachusetts judge ruled this week that prosecutors can tell the jury about two tattoos they contend relate to the crimes for which Hernandez, a former star NFL player, is awaiting trial: murder charges for the fatal shootings of two Boston men in 2012 and a witness intimidation charge for the nonfatal shooting of a former Hernandez friend in 2013.
Some other cases in which tattoos have figured prominently:
In 2011, a tattoo helped convict a California gang member in a 2004 fatal shooting at a liquor store. The tattoo on Anthony Garcia’s chest depicted the murder scene, including the name of the liquor store, the Christmas lights outside the store, a light post in the store’s parking lot and a convalescent home located next to the store. The tattoo also showed a chopper spraying bullets on a victim. Garcia’s gang nickname was “Chopper.” A prosecutor called Garcia’s tattoo a “nonverbal confession.”
It’s unusual for tattoos to make the difference between a conviction or acquittal, but law enforcement officials frequently use body art to help identify suspects. “What actually comes up in victims’ statements is that they sometimes can recognize a person by a tattoo more than they recognize what their face looks like. It’s something you can latch onto,” said Clairissa Breen, an assistant professor of criminal justice at Buffalo State College.
One problem is that tattoos are usually not specific enough to be seen by juries as proof of a defendant’s guilt. For example, a spider web tattoo can have various criminal meanings, but some may get similar tattoos simply because they like spider webs. “You need a lot more than that to convict someone,” said Boston criminologist Jack Levin.
In some cases, judges have granted motions to allow defense attorneys to cover up tattoos they believe will prejudice the jury against their clients. In Florida, a judge decided that the court should pay a makeup artist to cover up a swastika tattoo on the neck of a self-described neo-Nazi accused of stabbing his neighbor and killing a friend of his neighbor’s son. John Allen Ditullio’s lawyers argued successfully that his “scary” tattoos, which also included barbed wire on his face, could influence the jury. Ditullio was convicted of murder and attempted murder. Prosecutors said Ditullio targeted his neighbor because she was friends with a black man and killed her son’s friend because he was gay.