yes, he was in the courtroom and Pros. brought that up yesterdy
But, didn't the ruling take that into consideration? It's not still in Question, is it?
We'll have to see if the prosecution raises the issue again. However, on the 3rd day of the trial the Lauer 911 call was not played, so I don't know that they could claim that his identification was affected by hearing the call in court previously. And there is no perjury issue as far as I can tell. It seems like the only thing they could do is ask for the testimony to be stricken, and even if they did that, it would just highlight the testimony again for the jury.