Can a prosecutor argue that a single witness is sufficient to prove a fact?

Again, the challenged portion of the prosecutor's argument constitutes fair comment on the evidence; she was permitted to point out that defendant's version of events was not corroborated by any other evidence. "[T]he prosecutor's argument was that defendant's version of events was less believable because there was no corroboration from other sources, not that the jury was legally prohibited from crediting his testimony in the absence of corroboration, or that he had failed to meet a burden of proof." (People v. Boyette (2002) 29 Cal.4th 381, 434.) The trial court instructed the jury that the testimony of a single witness was sufficient to prove a fact.