In Godfrey v. State, 859 S.W.2d 583 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1993, no pet.), the court considered statements made by the prosecutor during the State's jury voir dire examination such as, if that defendant "gets up here and testifies, he will say anything to save his own hide, he will get up there and lie" and, "if he doesn't testify, he must be hiding something." Id. at 584. The Godfrey court held that those statements required reversal because they were "a misstatement of the law, particularly, a misstatement as to why a defendant may or may not choose to testify." Id. at 585. The Godfrey court also commented, and put emphasis, on the fact that the prosecutor, after an objection was overruled, "persevered with the same line of argument." Id. at 585. En route to its reversal, the court noted that the statements made by the prosecutor were "extremely improper" and that the "State should not be allowed to continue making such improper statements with impunity." Id. at 586.