☢ test - Í

testimony technically may not have constituted bad character evidence, [cit.] it placed Tyler’s character in issue in a way that was clearly harmful and irrelevant.” “Where counsel in the hearing of the jury make statements of prejudicial matters which are not in evidence, it is the duty of the court to interpose and prevent the same…. OCGA § 17-8-75.” Remanded for new trial. See Wright (January 3, 2003), below. Distinguished in Osmer (September 15, 2005), above. Wright v. State, 259 Ga.App. 74, 576 S.E.2d 64 (January 3, 2003). “Wright … complains of the admission of a videotaped statement, in which he comments that he told family members, as a joke, that his father molested him. Wright contended that the comment impermissibly placed his character in issue. The trial court ruled that the fact that Wright may have joked about being the victim of a crime did not reflect upon his character. In his appellate brief, Wright cites no authority for a contrary proposition, and our research has revealed none.” Compare Tyler (February 24, 2004), above. Green v. State , 242 Ga.App. 868, 532 S.E.2d 111 (March 17, 2000). Aggravated sodomy and related convictions affirmed. “The trial court did not err in admitting into evidence proof that, two years before, defendant had been discovered kissing then-six-year-old [same victim] J.A.G. or in admitting proof of defendant's statement that he used petroleum jelly to ‘get into tight places.’ Evidence of homosexuality or pederasty and indications of such sexual preferences are admissible in a trial for aggravated sodomy. Jones v. State, 172 Ga.App. 347, 348(2), 323 S.E.2d 174 (1984). While evidence of homosexuality unrelated to the offenses charged is inadmissible, Rini v. State, 235 Ga. 60, 65(2), 218 S.E.2d 811 (1975), both the prior act and statement in question have a logical connection to the offenses charged in that they illustrate defendant's preference for a particular victim or type of victim, plus reveal defendant's bent of mind or his modus operandi.” 7. DEMEANOR/GRIEF/REMORSE Berryhill v. State, 285 Ga. 198, 674 S.E.2d 920 (March 27, 2009). At defendant’s trial for murder of his infant son, trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to exclude evidence that defendant “failed to grieve” for the victim at the hospital while he was still alive, and at the funeral. “‘The evidence cited by defendant was relevant to the case and was not rendered inadmissible by the fact that it only incidentally placed his character in issue. [Cits.]’ Mullinax v. State, 273 Ga. 756, 760(3) (545 S.E.2d 891) (2001). See also Riley v. State, 278 Ga. 677, 687(10) (605 S.E.2d 488) (2004); Bagwell v. State, 270 Ga. 175, 178-179(1)(c) (508 S.E.2d 385) (1998); Allanson v. State, 235 Ga. 584, 587(4) (221 S.E.2d 3) (1975).” Fuller v. State, 295 Ga.App. 439, 672 S.E.2d 438 (January 6, 2009). “[E]vidence of a defendant's demeanor during the commission of a crime is relevant at trial, even if it incidentally places the defendant's character in issue. of a defendant's demeanor during the commission of a crime is relevant at trial, even if it incidentally places the defendant's character in issue.” Here, “the prosecutor asked the victim to describe Fuller's demeanor toward her during the armed robbery. The victim responded: ‘He had the face that he's looking at me right now, like, that mean, just horrible cold-hearted face.’ While the victim described Fuller's demeanor in an unflattering manner, the evidence was not inadmissible.” Quimbley v. State, 276 Ga.App. 174, 622 S.E.2d 879 (November 2, 2005). “‘[A] nonresponsive answer that impacts negatively on defendant’s character does not improperly place the defendant’s character in issue.’ Hansley v. State , 267 Ga. 48, 49(3), 472 S.E.2d 305 (1996). Here, the informant gave a nonresponsive answer to a question posed by Quimbley’s counsel. There was no indication that this testimony was encouraged by the State. [Cit.] And counsel’s decision to decline a curative instruction is one of trial strategy and does not create grounds for a mistrial. [Cit.]” Accord, Caldwell v. State , 237 Ga.App. 568, 515 S.E.2d 868 (April 8, 1999); Walker v. State , 282 Ga. 703, 653 S.E.2d 468 (November 21, 2007); Carrie v. State , 298 Ga.App. 55, 679 S.E.2d 30 (May 4, 2009); Herieia v. State , 297 Ga.App. 872, 678 S.E.2d 548 (May 14, 2009); Kim v. State , 298 Ga.App. 402, 680 S.E.2d 469 (June 16, 2009); Patterson v. State , 285 Ga. 597, 679 S.E.2d 716 (June 29, 2009) (witness’s “testimony concerning his fear of [defendant] and his knowledge that [defendant] was a violent person was in response to defense counsel queries about the witness's failure to leave [defendant] or seek help from police,” and witness was entitled to explain his answer.); Mister v. State , 286 Ga. 303, 678 S.E.2d 471 (November 23, 2009) (co-defendant, testifying for State at defendant’s murder trial, volunteered on cross that “he and Mister ‘knowed what we was doing, we was running around robbing people.’”); Lewis v. State , 287 Ga. 210, 695 S.E.2d 224 (May 17, 2010); Boatright v. State , 308 Ga.App. 266, 707 S.E.2d 158 (March 8, 2011) (FBI agent testified that a debt collection agency was looking for defendant, and that defendant had a suspended driver’s license); Billings v. State , 308 Ga.App. 248, 707 S.E.2d 177 (March 8, 2011); Reese v. State , 289 Ga. 446, 711 S.E.2d 717 (June 27, 2011); Boutier v. State , 328 Ga.App. 869, 763 S.E.2d 255 (August 26, 2014); Russell v. State , 295 Ga. 899, 764 S.E.2d 812 (October 20, 2014) (officer’s brief, nonresponsive reference to another alleged and uncharged assault victim was adequately cured by