ALTHOUGH THERE IS DISAGREEMENT WITHIN THE LEGAL PROFESSION ABOUT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CONCEPT OF PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, THOSE WHO PLAN, BUILD, AND OPERATE JAILS TRADITIONALLY HAVE REGARDED THE PURPOSE OF THEIR FACILITIES SIMPLY AS THAT OF DETAINING CRIMINALS. MOST JAILS, THOUGH OFTEN INOFFENSIVE WHEN SEEN FROM THE OUTSIDE, ARE ESSENTIALLY CAGES ON THE INSIDE. JAIL OFFICIALS QUESTION THE APPLICABILITY OF THE PRESUMPTION PRINCIPLE TO THE DESIGN AND OPERATION OF JAILS, CONCERNING THEMSELVES PRIMARILY WITH SECURITY AND CONTROL. HOWEVER, COURTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY ARE DEMANDING THAT PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE BECOME PART OF THE DESIGN AND OPERATION OF JAILS. IN ESTABLISHING 'LEAST RESTRICTIVE' AS A PRINCIPLE OF JAIL DESIGN AND OPERATION, COURTS HAVE INSISTED UPON DIFFERENTIATION IN CELL DESIGN, AVAILABILITY OF RECREATION, ELIMINATION OF RECTAL SEARCHES, GREATER FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT, SINGLE OCCUPANCY ROOMS, EXTENSIVE CONTACT VISITS, UNCENSORED MAIL, ACCESS TO TELEPHONES, RIGHT TO PRIVACY, RESTRICTIONS ON SEARCH AND SEIZURE, AND MANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS. IN THEIR OPPOSITION TO SUCH REQUIREMENTS, MANY JAIL OFFICIALS CONTINUE TO EXHIBIT A CALLOUSNESS WITH REGARD TO THE NEEDS AND RIGHTS OF DETAINED PERSONS. JAIL OFFICIALS MUST OVERCOME THEIR PREOCCUPATION WITH CONTROL AND MAKE PRETRIAL JAILS CONSTITUTIONAL.