☢ test - Í

right to remain silent.” Accord, Jennings v. State , 282 Ga. 679, 653 S.E.2d 17 (November 5, 2007); Dingler v. State , 293 Ga.App. 27, 666 S.E.2d 441 (July 24, 2008); Lipscomb v. State , 315 Ga.App. 437, 727 S.E.2d 221 (April 9, 2012) (physical precedent only). 2. “During the State’s closing argument, the prosecuting attorney questioned whether someone who acted in self-defense would run away, and she continued with the following: ‘If you’ve got a good story, if you’ve got a good reason for doing something, what do you want to do? You want the police to know your side of the story. You want the police to know you were defending yourself. You are going to be right there.... You are not going to wait until you come into a courtroom and start talking about self-defense. You are going [to] talk about it on the day that it happens.’ … The State may offer evidence of the defendant’s flight from the scene, and argue that it is circumstantial evidence of his guilt. Renner v. State, 260 Ga. 515, 517-518(3)(b), 397 S.E.2d 683 (1990). However, a prosecutor may not comment on an accused’s pre-arrest silence or failure to come forward voluntarily, even if he chooses to testify at trial. Landers v. State, 270 Ga. 189, 190(2), 508 S.E.2d 637 (1998). Thus, even though Pearson testified in his own defense, the assistant district attorney should not have included in her argument a reference to his pre-trial failure to raise the defense of justification. See Mallory v. State, 261 Ga. 625, 629(5), 409 S.E.2d 839 (1991).” Fletcher v. State, 277 Ga. 795, 596 S.E.2d 132 (April 27, 2004). “[B]oth defense and prosecuting counsel should be permitted to comment during closing argument on the other side’s failure to call witnesses, so long as there is competent evidence before the jury that the missing witness had knowledge of material and relevant facts.” Based on Morgan v. State , 267 Ga. 203, 476 S.E.2d 747 (1996). Ellison v. State, 265 Ga.App. 446, 594 S.E.2d 675 (February 5, 2004). Prosecutor did not improperly comment on defendant’s silence. “[T]he prosecutor’s comments, which noted only that no one had contradicted the testimony of the accomplice, were not an improper comment on Ellison’s silence…. Where the prosecutor’s comments are not directed at the defendant’s decision not to testify but are directed at defense counsel’s failure to rebut or explain the State’s evidence, the comments are permissible . Johnson v. State, 271 Ga. 375, 383 (519 S.E.2d 221) (1999).” Accord, Martin v. State , 294 Ga.App. 117, 668 S.E.2d 549 (October 20, 2008) (commenting on defendant’s failure to present any witnesses establishing his apparent alibi defense – defendant himself not having testified). Brown v. State, 276 Ga. 192, 576 S.E.2d 870 (February 10, 2003). Trial court properly granted state’s motion in limine, prohibiting defense counsel “from referring in closing argument to the disparity between the number of witnesses subpoenaed by the State and the number of witnesses called to testify at trial.... since there was no evidence before the jury in the present case that any witnesses not called by the State had knowledge of material and relevant facts.” Miller v. State, 275 Ga. 730, 571 S.E.2d 788 (October 28, 2002). “[T]he prosecution may, in closing arguments, urge the jury to draw reasonable deductions from a defendant’s failure to produce purportedly favorable witnesses.” Accord, Jackson v. State , 271 Ga.App. 317, 609 S.E.2d 643 (December 9, 2004); Arrington v. State , 286 Ga. 335, 687 S.E.2d 438 (November 9, 2009). Grant v. State, 257 Ga.App. 275, 570 S.E.2d 597 (August 16, 2002). Trial court properly disallowed defense counsel from commenting, in closing, about the state’s failure to call the arresting officer to testify because there was no showing that the officer had information relevant to the facts of the case. There was no evidence presented that the officer did any independent investigation other than listening to both defendant and the victim at the scene and both testified at trial regarding what occurred at the scene and what they told the officer. Thomas v. State, 254 Ga.App. 129, 561 S.E.2d 468 (March 6, 2002). Prosecutor made statements in closing that the only witnesses to take the stand were State witnesses and that jurors could not “evaluate anybody else’s testimony because nobody else testified.” Held, prosecutor’s statements did not warrant a mistrial as State has right to argue that defendant failed to rebut or contradict evidence demonstrating guilt and the prosecutor’s arguments made in this case do not show a manifest intention on the part of the prosecutor to comment upon defendant’s failure to testify, nor were the remarks of such a character that a jury would necessarily construe them as a comment on defendant’s failure to testify. Lowe v. State, 245 Ga.App. 659, 538 S.E.2d 552 (August 24, 2000). Aggravated assault and related convictions affirmed; prosecutor’s closing argument wasn’t improper. “The prosecutor stated: ‘[b]ut you took an oath to decide this case based on the facts. And there's only one set of facts laid out for you here.’ This statement is not a comment on Lowe's failure to testify, but rather appears to be a comment that the facts presented by the State had not been rebutted. A prosecutor may comment on the defense's failure to present rebuttal evidence. Johnson v. State, 271 Ga. 375, 383(15)(a), 519 S.E.2d 221 (1999); Matthews v. State, 268 Ga. 798, 804(6), 493 S.E.2d 136 (1997). Thus, we hold that the prosecutor's intention