Another area where jurors' assumptions, unchallenged by the judge's instructions, could lead to arbitrariness concerns jurors' beliefs about the consequences of their failure to simultaneously agree on a penalty. Why should jurors be intentionally kept in the dark about information that could, at times, determine whether a defendant lives or dies? Human decisions are fallible; partial and impulsive and, in capital cases, such decisions can never be completely eliminated. While such fallibility is undesirable in determining the outcome of any process, it would be reassuring to know that where the consequences are irrevocable such as death, tolerance for fallibility is low. The data suggests, however, that this is not the case. Prejudice and arbitrariness would be the consequence. The United States Constitution guarantees the right to a trial by jury, in the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments. Most Americans view jury trials as an important safeguard in our justice system, and depictions of jury trials and associated events are ubiquitous in movies, television shows, and popular literature. Despite the significance and historical importance of the jury trial, only a small percentage of individuals accused of a crime are tried by a jury. A recent estimate by Maguire and Flanagan (1991) states that approximately 6% of those accused of crimes are actually tried. Most cases end with the charges being dropped or reduced or the defendant entering into a plea agreement. However, a larger percentage of defendants charged with murder, approximately 33%, receive a jury trial (Maguire & Flanagan, 1991), and the percentage is most likely to increase for those charged with capital charges (2006). facts or evidence that might be presented at a trial, the structure of the American justice system allows for the introduction into court of extra-legal circumstances, including appearance, demeanor, and body language, which can influence behavior and conduct of the tribunal actors. also the results of the processes". Most people might think that they have the ability to make decisions based on evidence alone, that an educated jury can surely make an impartial judgment on an individual and not take into consideration their physical appearance. There are many studies that prove this theory to be wrong. The appearance of a defendant in a courtroom is extremely important and taken into consideration by the judge, jury, prosecutors and even the media. According to Michael AE (2006), “Physical appearance and attractiveness within the courtroom are positive and highly valued attributes that can significantly influence jury decision-making behaviors.” Studies show that appearance has a large effect on the outcome of the trial, Michael AE (2006), conducted a research in which 124 university students read the summary of a trial in which a plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the accused of damages and injuries caused following a road accident. “Students were asked, based on the evidence and facts presented, to rule in favor of the plaintiff or defendant and, if appropriate, to award monetary damages. To test the