
	Having watched most of the televised trial, I can answer that
when such statements were made by the defense atty, the prosecutor did
object, and the judge tended to sustain the ones that were obviously
falling under the "self-incrimination" type of objection.  There was
quite a bit of meta-discussion during the trial over the use of graphic
language, with most folks asking the judge if she wanted to hear the
exact language.  Practically every time the defense tried to get the
plaintiffs to "self-incriminate" by asking them such questions, there
were objections and sustains.

	At one point the defense managed to get in a quip about
"solicitation for a felony" and the judge herself said "sustained"
before the prosecutor could get the objection stated.