What proof does the court need to establish that a child was not sexually molested by a series of sexual acts?

The proof in this case shows the child was not "molested" by a series of acts, but by a single act on each occurrence. Just as "[m]ultiple sex acts cannot be held continuous conduct on a theory of there being but one act of sexual abuse" (People v. Madden, supra, 116 Cal.App.3d 212, 218, 171 Cal.Rptr. 897), so also the multiple occurrences of annoyance or molestation here cannot properly be deemed a single annoyance or molestation. The jury must unanimously agree on which act or acts constitute the offense.