Does the Attorney General have any obligation to objectify, strike or admonition the testimony before the jury?

The Attorney General argues that by not objecting, moving to strike, or requesting an admonition, the defense forfeited any claim that this testimony was inadmissible. (Evid.Code, 353; see People v. Navarette, supra, 30 Cal.4th at p. 515, 133 Cal.Rptr.2d 89, 66 P.3d 1182.) Defendant argues that trial counsel could not have objected without appearing callous, and thereby alienating the jury, and for this reason we should excuse the normal requirement of a timely objection and a request for an admonition. We reject this argument for the reasons explain above in part III.B.1.