Can a prosecutor's "were they lying" questions to a jury at a sexual assault trial affect jury deliberations?

Even if we were to conclude that the prosecutor's "were they lying" questions were improper, defendant cannot establish that any misconduct was prejudicial. The challenged questions did not present evidence that the jury would not have otherwise inferred: defendant had one version of events, other witnesses had another. Defendant's unsurprising view that he was telling the truth and others were lying could not have affected jury deliberations. The court instructed the jury that it was to determine issues of credibility based on its own assessment of the evidence. There is no likelihood that defendant would have achieved a better result had these questions not been asked, nor was the trial infected with such unfairness as to deprive defendant of due process. (See People v. Riggs, supra, 44 Cal.4th at pp. 300-301.)