This court will not disturb a jury's verdict unless the evidence is so palpably contrary to the verdict or so unreasonable as to cause a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused. ( People v. Johnson (1974), 18 Ill. App.3d 219, 309 N.E.2d 619.) The motion of the State to strike certain items submitted by defendant in the record will be granted, and those items are ordered stricken from the record.

Although there is no dispositive Michigan authority, we believe that a similar philosophy should apply to polling defects as utilized in other jurisdictions. In both Illinois and California for instance, failure to object to incomplete polling waives the issue for appeal. See People v Johnson, 18 Ill. App. 219; 309 N.E.2d 619 (1974), People v Lessard, 58 Cal.2d 46; 25 Cal.Rptr. 78; 375 P.2d 46 (1962). For our own jurisdiction, we select the procedure for testing jury verdicts followed in People v Clarence Williams, 37 Mich. App. 219; 194 N.W.2d 527 (1971).

In fact, after the 11th juror was polled, defense counsel thanked the court. Further, the First District has addressed this question in People v. Johnson (1974), 18 Ill. App.3d 219, 309 N.E.2d 619. In that case, only 11 jurors were polled, defense counsel made no objection at the time of polling, the jurors were returned after the error was discovered, and the remaining juror was polled, answering that the verdict was and is his verdict.