With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of any of the other witnesses. Thus, only a small, albeit important, portion of the testimony admitted at trial was erroneously admitted. Defendant calls to our attention several cases in which courts, when faced with similar situations, have found that the admission of expert testimony, in sexual abuse cases, which vouches for the credibility of other witnesses constitutes reversible or even plain error, and our own research has unearthed several other such cases. See, e.g., Whitted, 11 F.3d at 786-87 (plain error); United States v. Birdsall, 47 M.J. 404, 410 (C.A.A.F.1998); see also, e.g., Commonwealth v. Colin C, 419 Mass. 54, 643 N.E.2d 19, 23 (Mass.1994); State v. Gokey, 154 Vt. 129, 574 A.2d 766, 772 (Vt.1990). But see, e.g., Brown v. State, 523 So.2d 729, 730 (Fla.Ct.App.1988) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Rather, 37 Mass.App.Ct. 140,

A: holding that the admission of a family photo was harmless error in light of the overwhelming evidence in support of the conviction
B: holding doyle violations harmless where evidence of guilt overwhelming
C: holding the error harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt
D: holding that prosecutorial misconduct was harmless in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt
C.