Bull judge. You know very well that appeal courts frown upon continuous objections in the record. They prefer one at the beginning, one in the middle, and one at the end. That is all it takes.
Just so. Here in CA it’s Evidence Code Sec 352- evidence that is more prejudicial than probative should be excluded. I assume NY is similar. Her testimony should not have been allowed at all, at the very least the particulars of the encounter should not have been allowed. It’s simply not relevant to the elements of the purported crime. Marchan knows this and he’s trying to cover his tracks by blaming the defense for not objecting enough