Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court's exclusion of defendant's family during the testimony of the complainant at defendant's trial on the charge of rape in the first degree did not constitute an abuse of discretion. Here the Trial Judge, having presided over defendant's pretrial hearings, knew of the embarrassing and sensitive nature of the complainant's testimony. The court closed the courtroom only during the victim's testimony for her psychological well-being as well as to foster the truth discovery process (see People v Glover, 60 N.Y.2d 783; People v. Joseph, 59 N.Y.2d 496; People v Jones, 82 A.D.2d 674, application for lv to app den 55 N.Y.2d 751). Moreover, we note that defendant made no request for a hearing and voiced only a general objection to the court's ruling (see People v. Pollock, 50 N.Y.2d 547, 550; People v. Dawson, 84 A.D.2d 957). Defendant's claim regarding alleged error in the court's charge on intent was not preserved for review ( People v. Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467, 473).