What is the effect of the court's admonishment to the jury not to let the prosecutor's statements go unanswered?

Contrary to Cdebaca's contention, the court did not let the prosecutor's statements go unanswered. Each time the prosecutor made an objectionable statement, the court admonished the jury to follow the instructions, not the statements of the prosecutor. The impression given was that there was something inaccurate about the statement and the jury was to follow the instructions. The court read to the jury the elements for provocation for voluntary manslaughter from CALCRIM No. 570 three times: before closing arguments, during the prosecutor's rebuttal argument after an objection, and again after the rebuttal argument. We presume the jury followed the instructions of the court absent any contrary indication. (People v. Gray (2005) 37 Cal.4th 168, 217.)