Science Of Small Talk

Is the Question aimed at political beliefs? If so, then the argument would be made that the associations with thses symbols arent universal, and that in nature is also one reason for people choosing to display them. If they were eveidence one would have to understand what the defendent's intentions were. Wouldnt this add a second dimension? If the defendent is on trial for actions and not associations or tattoos then they were rightly covered up. I understand this by the courts advising particular attention even to an individual who represents himself. Then we need to ask if the individual has the right to make a political statment? though I dont know the words needed to express this in a legal sense; I do know that a person is required to proper attire when appearing before a judge. This may be for both of the party's benefit, and would suggest adaquate reason that cases are judged on an individual basis.

Those tattoos are a choice made my that individual, largely to communicate something to himself and others. He has made a choice to display externally things most people elect to keep on the inside. I know many people are getting tattoos and then having them removed these days. But as a tattooed person myself, I think that tattoos are something that you and everybody around you have to live with-- that's why they should be carefully considered before they are applied.

i believe that this man has elected to say things through his tattoos that most people would have chosen to keep to themselves. He still has to live with that decision, now that he will be in court.