Well.. Let's do some criminal law 101:

The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. So from that position, you testifying in your own criminal trial leaves you only one direction to move the needle: towards guilt.

Not “oh he shouldn’t have done that” but rather “why is his truthful testimony going to prove any guilt?”

A skilled prosecutor can take your truthful testimony and turn it into an admission of guilt. For example, a person accused of battery when someone trips into him and he instinctively put his hands up to protect himself from being injured. The defendant takes the stand. The prosecutor asks him if he struck the victim. He truthfully answers "no." The prosecutor asks if he "made physical contact" with the victim. Truthfully, "Yes." Prosecutor asks if the victim knew he was going to touch him and gave him permission. Truthful answer, "No." Prosecutor asks if he raised his hands in front of him as he and the victim were in close proximity. Truthfully, "yes."

The defense asks all the right questions: Did you intentionally raise your hands? "No, it was a reaction." Did you move toward the victim? "No, he tripped." Did you intend to make contact with the victim? "No, contact was incidental."

In closing arguments, the prosecution gets to go last. So the last thing the jury hears is this: "The defendant in his own testimony admitted that he came upon the victim, and without consent or warning, raised his hands toward the victim and used them to make physical contact. That is the legal definition of battery and you must convict."

I do not agree that our country should only let the lawyers speak. Lets hear the truth from the mouth of the witness.

Let's hope that you're never charged with a crime and go to trial. If so, I hope you listen to your lawyers.