772 JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLICY
associated with those who wear eyeglasses are deeply ingrained
in our minds in early stages of life.^237
The United States judicial system is designed to eliminate
juror biases. Purposefully eliciting any biases from the jury
undermines the goal of the judicial system, which is to seek the
truth in all cases.^238 While defendants have the right to control
their appearance at trial, there exists a distinction between a
defendant who simply presents himself or herself in “neat and
clean attire” and with “good grooming” and a defendant who
uses attire to present “an unrealistic suggestion of character.”^239
A defendant who wears unnecessary eyeglasses fabricates a
vision handicap that is intimately tied to stereotypes of favorable
characteristics and manipulates the jury into believing a lie: that
the defendant truly requires eyeglasses. By providing a jury with
a modified change-of-appearance instruction, a court will enable
the jury to have a more complete and truthful base of knowledge
when considering the facts of the case and the jury will be better
equipped to consider the defendant’s change in appearance.
(^237) Walline et al., supra note 44, at 223 (describing a study finding that
children as young as six years old correlate wearing eyeglasses with character
traits of intelligence and honesty).
(^238) Strier, supra note 22, at 99.
(^239) Johnson v. Commonwealth, 449 S.E.2d 819, 821 (Va. Ct. App.
1994).