I’ve heard that no one committing murder ever expects to get caught, but getting the word “murder” tattooed on your neck seems like tempting fate. That decision may come back to haunt Jeffrey Wade Chapman of Barton County, Kansas. Chapman is currently facing trial for the 2011 murder of Damon Galliart, whose body was found by hunters in a ditch outside the town of Great Bend, KS.



I’ve heard that no one committing murder ever expects to get caught, but getting the word “murder” tattooed on your neck seems like tempting fate. That decision may come back to haunt Jeffrey Wade Chapman of Barton County, Kansas. Chapman is currently facing trial for the 2011 murder of Damon Galliart, whose body was found by hunters in a ditch outside the town of Great Bend, KS.



Chapman has “MURDER” in large mirror-image letters tattooed across his neck, and while this is not necessarily an admission of guilt, his lawyers fear the tattoo could be “extremely prejudicial to Mr. Chapman if introduced at trial or observed by the jury.”

Therefore, they have filed a motion asking that a tattoo artist remove or cover up the tattoo–which, as you can see in the pic above, is not easily hidden by clothing. “Mr. Chapman’s tattoos are not relevant to any material facts and Mr. Chapman asks for the court to exclude any mention of his tattoos at trial and further to be allowed to cover them up in an appropriate manner,” the motion states.

The motion also tells us that “Mr. Chapman has secured a licensed tattoo artist from Hays who is willing to go to the jail,” but there’s a problem with that idea too–Kansas Administrative Code 69-15-14 says “tattoo artists shall not practice at any location other than a licensed facility.” Meanwhile, the sheriff of Barton County is unwilling to take Chapman from the jail to a licensed tattoo shop to get the tattoo removed. Chapman’s trial begins Monday, April 28, so time is running out.

What do you think–should a murder suspect be able to get a visible “murder” tattoo removed before trial, or is the existence of that tattoo a relevant fact in the case?