In a human trafficking case, can the defense in closing argue defendant committed no crime at all with respect to Doe 2?

Here, the record shows the defense in closing relied extensively on Royce's expert testimony in aggressively arguing defendant committed no crime at all with respect to Doe 2. That is, there was no substantial evidence in the record that defendant encouraged Doe 2 to break the law, but that he simultaneously lacked the requisite intent necessary for the offense of human trafficking. (See People v. Leal (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 782, 792 [noting a trial court may properly give a lesser included offense instruction "where the evidence shows that if the defendant is guilty, he [or she] is guilty of the greater offense"].)