D is charged with exploding a destruction device, causing great bodily injury to V. V testifies about a bomb in a package exploding as he opened the package. While testifying, V draws on the blackboard a diagram of the bomb. The prosecutor calls B, the court bailiff, who testifies, without objection, that while V was drawing the diagram, B was seated near the far end of the jury box and heard D tell his lawyer: "It was not quite like that." D is convicted and makes a motion for a new trial on the ground that B's testimony was admitted into evidence in violation of D's lawyer-client privilege. How should the court rule?