I've seen a lot of inappropriate and stupid questions by prosecutors over the years. I can't recall a more outrageous one than invoking a specific religion, challenging the witness' good-faith practice/adherence to that religion and then a point blank statement to the jury that the defendant is charged with committing a crime that the religion deems a "mortal sin." That is mistrial territory and something a first year prosecutor knows not to do. How is this person trying a case as challenging and complex as the Lindsay Clancy case?