Defendant failed to preserve his claim that testimony about an incident in which he was discovered, draped only in a towel, in the presence of the child victim constituted improper "uncharged crime" evidence, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice, particularly since defendant made affirmative use of this testimony (People v Littlejohn, 72 A.D.2d 515). Were we to review this claim, we would find it without merit, because mere speculation that a jury might discern something sinister about a defendant's behavior does not render that behavior an "uncharged crime" (People v Bowls, 185 A.D.2d 116), and because the challenged evidence was relevant in that it was interwoven with People v Vails ( 43 N.Y.2d 364, 368), and completed the narrative of People v Gines ( 36 N.Y.2d 932), the circumstances that triggered the child victim's outcry.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Ross, Rubin and Williams, JJ.