Keywords

Tattoo; Jury; Bias; Body Art; Attorney; Prejudice

Abstract

Within the legal field, there appears to be a pervasive stigmatization of exposed tattoos. Law firms justify their explicit or implicit bans on exposed body art by arguing that tattoos could negatively prejudice jurors who may be biased against people with tattoos. This thesis intends to put that notion to the test via a digital survey. Subjects who meet the qualifications to serve as a juror in the United States were shown one of two identical videos of an opening statement. However, in one video the attorney has a neck tattoo, whereas in the other the attorney does not. Subjects were then asked a series of questions measuring their impressions of the video to determine if there was some difference correlated with the presence of the exposed neck tattoo. After reviewing the responses, responses indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between when the attorney had or did not have the neck tattoo. Subjects did not mention the tattoo a single time in any open-ended questions, and the ultimate verdict jurors came to did not have any statistically significant difference either. The aim of this thesis was to allow prospective attorneys to make educated decisions about whether to get a tattoo, whether they should display this tattoo in court, and how that tattoo can influence jurors in court.

Thesis Completion Year

2025

Thesis Completion Semester

Summer

Thesis Chair

Patrick, Carlton

College

College of Community Innovation and Education

Department

Legal Studies

Thesis Discipline

Legal Studies

Language

English

Access Status

Open Access

Length of Campus Access

None

Campus Location

UCF Downtown

Download

Supplemental Files

Share

COinS
 

Rights Statement

In Copyright