It is well settled that arguments of counsel rest within the control and discretion of the presiding trial judge. In the argument of hotly contested cases, counsel is granted wide latitude. My mama was going to take me, but we forgot. Viewed in context, we do not believe the prosecutor's argument was improper. And what interest do you think Darius Phillips has got in the outcome of this case other than his thoughts of his possible future safety there.
Objection is overruled.
First, we do not subscribe to defendant's interpretation that the prosecutor mischaracterized Phillips' testimony when the prosecutor argued that Phillips' only interest in testifying was perhaps a concern for his personal safety. Further, we cannot agree that, as contended by defendant, the record is devoid of any evidence from which it could be reasonably inferred that Darius Phillips had thoughts concerning his future safety. We note in this regard that Phillips testified that prior to the murder, he had intended to spend the night with defendant. However, after witnessing defendant shoot a man in the manner he described, Phillips decided to go home to his mother instead. Based upon this evidence, it is certainly a reasonable inference that Phillips, who at the time of trial was eleven years old, was afraid of the prospects of facing defendant and giving testimony against him.