Opinion ID: 614073
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Tattoo Removal

Text: Additionally, the BIA's conclusion that Cole did not meet his burden under CAT rested in part on its assertion that Cole could have his tattoos removed so that he would not be perceived as a gang member upon return to Honduras. Given that statement, we cannot tell whether the BIA would have reached the same result had it not assumed that the tattoos could feasibly be removed in a timely manner. [11] But that assumption falters if the record evidence on the issue is credited: There is evidence that the tattoo removal process is quite long and extremely painful. Moreover, the process can leave permanent scarring. Canales also testified that there is a far greater demand for tattoo removal in Honduras than there are places that can provide such services, leading many tattooed individuals to resort to dangerous home remedies such as burning themselves with cigarette butts or battery acid. Added to likely lengthy delay in beginning tattoo removal is the length of time it takes to remove tattoos once the process begins. As a result of these circumstances, Cole would likely be unable to remove his tattoos until well after his arrival in Honduras, and thus would face being perceived as a gang member for as long as it tooklikely quite a whileto get them removed. And even after getting his tattoos removed, the record indicates, visible scarring could mean that he would still be a targeted by rival gangs, police, and death squads. The BIA's statement concerning tattoo removal does not discuss any of this evidence or explain why it is not dispositive. Thus, once again, the BIA did not give reasoned consideration to potentially dispositive testimony with regard to the probability of torture, and we must remand for further consideration and explanation.