In my opinion, criminal trials have become more about procedure than the truth. I'm not saying that procedure and constitutial laws are not important, but the truth is also important, but has taken a back seat to other parts of trials.

(Not long ago a defense attorney objected to me stating a piece of sealing tape was from a particular agency because I had no foundation of knowing that was true - this was when the name of the agency was clearly printed on the sealing tape and I had seen the tape hundreds of times in the past. The tricks that are played to avoid the truth are amazing and frustrating. On one murder trial, when the suspect was arrested he had jet black hair, huge tattoos on his neck and was most likely on steroids because of his bulky size. When the trial eventually started about a year later, he had lost all kinds of weight, cut his hair and let it go back to its natural brown and wore glasses, a suit and tie and looked just like a typical college kid. One last example of how the truth is intimidated and prevented had to do with a witnessed gang killing. A wonderfully brave woman who lived in the same public housing complex where the murder occurred witnessed the murder and not only testified in the first trial, but also testified in the second trial after the conviction from the first was overturned. When this woman testified, one half of the court room was filled with the defendant's fellow gang members who were there to intimidate her. It didn't work and the second trial also ended in conviction. Now, what I could never understand is why the judge to this trial did not empty the courtroom. To this day the brave woman is still around somewhere and safe).

Up here the defendants are usually cleaned up and do not appear in front of juries in jail uniforms and most likely if a defendant were to be shackled or cuffed it would probably have to be due to an overt act of aggression. More often than not, more guards are available and even officers.