Perhaps you and I live in different parts of the world?
First, there was no jury present. I don't know about you, but I see a difference in the behavior of participants when there is no jury present. Every judge I know (ask your neighbor) has much more formal expectations of decorum (sometimes getting downright onery about it) when there is a jury. There is no jury yet in this case.
Most of the public is not watching these brief snippets of proceedings. Only people who are deeply into WS or reddit or social media have even the slightest clue about how those PD's were behavior (and of those, half would probably think their behavior was actually comforting and fair - insofar as the defendant is presumed innocent).
Behind closed doors is completely different and would take many, many posts to discuss.
I do agree that the shielding behavior of the one PD is really out of the ordinary and I would not allow it if I could prevent it. But judges cannot act as media advisors or television producers. If they allow media, then the Defense Counsel gets to respond as they wish, as long as not illegal.
I personally find their behavior entirely necessary - but that's a different topic. I also believe the Judge knows exactly why the PD is behaving as they are and they have spoken to him about it prior to the proceedings we saw. IMO, some behavioralist (probably FBI) has advised the parties as to how and why such behavior may be advisable or even necessary.
Once again, all this debate over what may be necessary or professional behavior on the part of the Defense is merely going to lead to one place: We, the public, will see far less if we don't take into account how Defense Counsel has to behave in order to best represent their client - not the State's interest - but the Defendant's interest.
It's in no one's interest if TS literally goes apesh!t consistently in the courtroom. Not at all.
