Constitutional Law, Criminal law, Society

On The Horns Of A Dilemma: Massachusetts Defendant Raises Potential Prejudice In Jurors Seeing . . . Him

1408728555478_wps_9_Caius_Veiovis_unique_appeThere is an interesting debate going on in a Massachusetts courtroom over prejudicial evidence in a murder trial. No, it is not pictures of the victims or crime scene. It is the appearance of the defendant himself. You see, Caius Veiovis, 33, had himself implanted with horns and had a satanic tattoo put on his face. Now this defense counsel is understandably concerned that the jury will recoil at the very sight of him. However, there is only so much that a court can do to protect a defendant against his own appearances, particularly when he spent considerable time and money to look satanic.

1408728545064_Image_galleryImage_This_panel_of_undated_phoVeiovis is accused of participating in the kidnapping, torture, and murder of three men: David Glasser, Edward Frampton and Robert Chadwell (shown right). Adam Hall, 37, a member of the Hell’s Angels, was convicted in February of first-degree murder and kidnapping, and sentenced to three consecutive life terms, plus 42 years. That should cover any longevity issues in his family.

1408728546047_wps_7_This_panel_of_undated_phoVeiovis allegedly helped Hall kill Glasser because he was expected to testify against Hall. The other men were killed to allegedly eliminate witnesses to the Glasser killing. A third co-conspirator has also been convicted and sentenced to three consecutive life terms.

1408728546051_wps_8_This_panel_of_undated_pho Veiovis likely has no good option since, given the gruesome murders, any plea would leave him in prison for life regardless of the deal. He might have concluded that he has nothing to lose and everything to gain by throwing himself on the mercy of the jurors.

That takes us back to Veiovis’ appearance. The court has struggled how to address the initial shock at seeing Veiovis. The judge understandably was reluctant to have a picture of Veiovis shown throughout voir dire since that could raise other prejudicial questions. However, this issue was raised by the defense in how to avoid a shock to the jury members. Moreover, jurors are ordinarily allowed to see the demeanor of the accused not only in testifying but in response to testimony as part of their deliberations.

Veiovis has two rows of bumps on his forehead, a ‘666’ tattoo between them, and other facial and neck tattoos. He even surgically altered the shape of his ears to make them elf-like.

Defense lawyer James Reardon Jr. has quite a challenge there but I cannot see any way that the court will be able to protect Veiovis from his chosen appearance. He went through a great deal of trouble to look Satanic and he succeeded. It is just not the best look when you are trying to establish a presumption of innocence.

Source: Berkshire Eagle and originally found on ABA Journal

155 thoughts on “On The Horns Of A Dilemma: Massachusetts Defendant Raises Potential Prejudice In Jurors Seeing . . . Him”

  1. http://www.bpnews.net/BPPhotoSearch.asp?mo1=1&mo2=12&search=missionary&yr=2007&offset=50
    http://www.google.com/search?q=tattooed+baptist+preacher&sa=X&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=4H77U8hYg7HIBOrDgfAJ&ved=0CCkQ7Ak&biw=1024&bih=672#facrc=_&imgrc=J6c0EtJaHbLdXM%253A%3BYP_P02j4yFkOjM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.bpnews.net%252FImageServer.asp%253Ffname%253Dimages%252FIMG2007726471HI.jpg%2526width%253D660%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.bpnews.net%252FBPPhotoSearch.asp%253Fmo1%253D1%2526mo2%253D12%2526search%253Dmissionary%2526yr%253D2007%2526offset%253D50%3B660%3B990
    A Baptist!

  7. So Squeeky, do you think I or any of the other commenters that have self identified as being on the “left” have no values, or raised our children with no values? Squeeky, I guess you don’t agree that secular people have values. That would be a huge broad brush condemnation and it would be very mistaken, not even speaking of narrow minded.

  8. @annie

    Yes, Annie. That is exactly what I am saying, that too many people on the left are more interested in getting votes, making money, staying in power, and satisfying their own egos than any sort of normative values. Remember the last Democratic Convention and the mention of God vote thingy???

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  9. Perhaps if one goes to the trouble of looking like that, one should stay as far away from the actual criminal element as possible.
    Just sayin…

    Alternatively: Stupid is as Stupid does.

  10. Squeeky, so you are saying those on the left believe “values” are not important to them, because….Why? Do you think secular people do not promote values? Do Buddhist people not have values? How about Jewish people?

  12. @PaulCS

    I think he did it for the same reason animals try to look fierce and crazy; both to deter attacks and to intimidate victims. I mean, if this guy was a bill collector and showed up at your house to collect, wouldn’t you be a little more likely to pay up?

    That being said, this dude is kinda of like a poster child for the Leftist’s non-values oriented approach to diversity. If instead of being on trial for murder, he had applied for a job at an elementary school, and been rejected for his looks, the ACLU would be all over it, complaining that there was no difference between wearing a cross necklace and his horns; there there was no reason to prefer non-Satanism over Satanism, and that if the little kids had nightmares, then that was just tough!, etc.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. Squeeky – I have an expensive security screen door just because of people like this. 🙂

  14. Have someone stand in for him? Are you kidding? He chose to look like that. Tough cookies. If you don’t want to be judged based on your appearance, Don’t do things that will bring that judgement upon you.

    1. TMV – people are judged on their appearance and this defense attorney is trying to keep his client from being convicted before opening statements. I can see his problem, I just don’t see a solution.

  16. Expressing his individuality through multiple disfigurements makes him quite a catch for the sufficiently enlightened. He’s in Massachusetts, so it is not impossible that he wrangles a marriage proposal out of the deal from a Harvard professor or undergrad.

  17. Although the defendant’s appearance is self-inflicted, he retains a presumption of innocence. His defense attorney has a duty to present the best legal case available, which in this instance appears difficult. However, the attorney could present the defendant as a social “victim” who has been falsely accused solely due to his appearance. The tactic is to attempt to gain the jury’s sympathy based on his “grotesque” looks. That said, the actual evidence against him (other than his appearance) may be overwhelming and he will get what he deserves.

  19. Porkchop, Because the jury has a right to see the defendant as do the witnesses. Watching how a defendant comports himself in a trial is what a juror does. That was easy!

  20. Can someone be convicted just for being ‘Stupid Ugly’…. Well then, GUILTY!!!

Comments are closed.