What is the effect of a prosecutor's remark that the prosecution has proved premeditated murder beyond a reasonable doubt?

In this context, the prosecutor's remark was ambiguous. The remark was proper if it meant only that the prosecution had proved premeditated murder of a peace officer beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the weakness of the defense response had left the record devoid of any basis for reasonable doubt. The remark was improper if meant to absolve the prosecution from its prima facie obligation to overcome reasonable doubt on all elements. Because timely objection, admonition, and instruction would have cured any prejudicial confusion, defendant's failure to intervene below waives a direct claim of misconduct. (People v. Green (1980) 27 Cal.3d 1, 27, 164 Cal.Rptr. 1, 609 P.2d 468; People v. Scott (1982) 129 Cal.App.3d 301, 306-307, 180 Cal.Rptr. 891.)