Does the prosecutor's statement that the burden of proof lessens if the accused is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt?

Additionally, it is not reasonably likely that the jury understood the prosecutor's statements as lessening the burden of proof. The "beyond a reasonable doubt standard" was referred to numerous times in argument, and the jury was instructed that it must find each element of the crime true beyond a reasonable doubt under CALJIC No. 2.90. The jury is presumed to understand and follow the instructions of the trial court. (People v. Archer (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 197, 204.) Absent some affirmative indication in the record to the contrary, we presume the jury followed the instructions given. (People v. Holt (1997) 15 Cal.4th 619, 662.)