In People v. Bronson, 32 N.Y.2d 254 (1973) in an outrageously inflammatory summation, the prosecutor characterized the defendant as a "liar, an animal, a beast." There the Court of Appeals characterized the summation as "largely argument by epithet rather than by logic" (p. 261). With it all, the court sustained the assault in the second degree conviction and observed, "The District Attorney accepts the criticism that the summation was improper, but, on any view, it was hardly of sufficient forcefulness to influence the jury in the light of overwhelming evidence and the stark facts of the brutal, irrational crime committed" (p. 262). The court concluded, "In this case, it is at most only arguable that the prosecutor's misconduct could have produced a greater adverse effect on the jury then did the bizarre facts of the crime, and the overwhelming evidence of culpability" (Id. at 262.)