#141 Jason Flom with Pierre Rushing

the shooter. A few weeks and several descriptions later, Green would claim to have seen C wearing a red hat. A few days after that, police would approach Pierre Rushing, a man who had never been known as C, but wearing a red hat. They'd bring Pierre's juvie photo and his name to Robert Green, who went on to identify him as the shooter, despite a solid alibi, no physical evidence whatsoever or anything to corroborate Robert Green's highly questionable identification.

Pierre Rushing's burgeoning rap career and promising future were stolen by Green and the criminal legal system. He's currently serving fifty to life for a frivolous and tragic crime committed by a drug dealer needs See. Patrick Smith has since signed half a davits and testified to Pierre's innocence, and another of C's customers that night has bravely said a legal name to the culprit, and even though Mr Rushing did not name See, we have censored his name from

this episode from Mr Rushing Safety. Meanwhile, the state of California continues to ignore evidence of Pierre's actual innocence and to fight his honest attempts to regain his freedom. This is Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flam. Welcome back to Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flam. That's me and today we're going to tell you about the case of Pierre Rushing. We'll speak with one of his post conviction attorneys, Marvin Lou as well as taking a call from Kern Valley Correction

in California to hear from Pierre himself. This is Global telling you have a Fred call. From this call and your telephone number will be monitored and recorded. To accept this call, say or dial five now, thank you for you thing Global Hill Link. Hello, good morning, good morning. I'm glad you're here. I mean, I'm sorry you're here under these circus stances, but I'm definitely glad you're here. And I know we have limited time, so let's get

right into it. Today's episode, we're gonna tell the story of the man we have on the phone now, Pierre Rushing, who's serving fifty years. The Nightmare starts on April fifteen, two thousand eleven. A three five am. Um, when there's a murder. But let's go back to your childhood, because you had a difficult upbringing and you were coming out of that and building a career in music when it all went haywire in California. My father was ass and tea in and out of prison, um smuggle with addictives,

crack cocaine. So I don't want to say like any other Oakland kid, but as I mean, a lot of a lot of kids in the grew up in the nineties where just products of our environment. We grew up looking at things that we believe to be right. So we as we mature, we get to see that they were really wrong. And how did you get into music? My auntie used to work for Keith Swift. Her name was Tracy Russie. She sins passed its two dosan thirteen.

But just being around her, she put me in her wing, just taking me to the studio with her as I became addictive music. Is it fair to say by two thousand and eleven things we're starting to look up for

you in terms of possibly building a career. And yeah, when I was arrested for this case, actually friends of mine has said that the police were looking for me for this time and we all laughed about it because everybody knew that I couldn't have done and I have been wrapped in and going to the student you're staying

assist in shooting videos. Um. And actually when I was arrest and I was over up for Bayery Live by the Name of Queen, and uh, we had a big like like like four with my patures on and promoting my music and everything. So you know it was coming up for me. Yeah, you were on exactly, You're on your way up. And then everything went completely haywire. Now let's turn the conversation to Marvin Lou. Marvin is a criminal defense attorney of some repute, and he has been

representing Pierre for some time. Now, let's just paint a picture of what happened. The date was April fiven, and what happened was two individuals by the name of Patrick Smith and Robert Green. We're doing crack cocaine for the day and a half leading up to this young man's killing, and Patrick Smith and Robert Green went to an apartment

in Oakland to purchase more crack cocaine. How Chrick Smith was driving, Robert Green stayed in the car while Patrick Smith went up to the apartment to purchase more drugs. So Patrick Smith meets up with his drug dealer. Patrick Smith knows him as C the letter C, who is the actual person responsible for the murder of Dawan Taylor. While Patrick Smith was in the apartment, there were several other people present, and Mr Taylor left the apartment shortly

after Mr Taylor left. Then sees iPod turned up missing and someone in the apartment said that Mr Taylor had taken sees iPod. What happened next was Patrick Smith, the shooter SEE, and another individual who was also charged as a co defendant named Andre Morris. They all left the apartment and went and got in Patrick Smith's car to go find Mr Taylor, who had allegedly taken sees iPod. Robert Green was waiting in the car, sitting in the front passenger seat. So pat Smith drives around the corner.

They see Mr Taylor walking down the street and See or Andre Morris. Pat Smith wasn't sure which told him to stop the car. See and Andre Morris got out of the car, confronted Mr Taylor, and See shot and killed Mr Taylor on the sidewalk in front of a fast food restaurant. They then got back into the car. Pat Smith drove a short distance. Both See and Mr Morris got out of the car and ran away. So

that that's the factual backdrop for this thing. Follow along here because Pierre, who were on the phone with now had no connection to viction, no knowledge of the actual perpetrator, and he was at his grandmother's at the time with a young lady named Lauren Richardson on the time and date of the murder. Have you ever had a nickname of Sea before? Never? Never. I've always went by the name of Stank or people from my neighbodies to call me peace, thank me here for my first Ms Pierre,

I've never never went by the name See. So what happened? How did you end up getting wrongfully convicted here. Well, one of the pastors, Robert Green, he goes to the police like five days after he allegedly see at this time, and he failed them that he's seen his murder and a guy named Seen committed this murder. He gives the police multiple different descriptions. I believe his first description is five,

a light skin, a hundred and twenty pounds. I haven't been a hundred tweet pounds if I was seen years old, let alone at nineteen years old, and I'm not light skinned. The second time, I believe you, see the police, he switches it up again. So allegedly he says he sees Seed on April thirties, which would have been fifteen days after the crime, and he went back to the police say, you know what, I lied again. I believe he was six foot to brown skinned, and they had on red

shirt and a red hat. I'm not sure what kind of line up they were showing it, but he still couldn't identify who they believed to be seen. The police seen in an area that he said that he had seen seeing. I believe it was made Bird wearing a red hat. And they stopped me. And when they stopped me. They said, what is your name? I don't lie to the police year Russian is my name? I said, hey, we're looking for a guy to beat a guy up.

I haven't been the guy up. And then they leave when they take that name back to I believe Robert Green, who was at the police station and they showing the picture four days after he's seen a guy with a red head. He said, you know what you had asked how Bessie? And that's how the whole way of his spun. Then looking I would have read had four days after the private rickass, he's seen this guy and a month

after the crime. When they first questioned you, they wanted to know what you were doing on the day of the crime. But when they were asking you this question, it was already five weeks later, right, And this is a trick that they used. Sometimes you're like that you're supposed to remember exactly. Like I ask anybody in the audience right now, what were you doing. Let's go back thirty five days from whatever day you're listening to this. Tell me now what you were doing at a particular

time on that day. And I give you a dollar because that's impossible. But it is very effective because then they can say you lied, because there's no way anyone could possibly remember that unless it was their birthday or some other like really important day. Right April fifteenth, as you would have it is my father's birthday. So without me even thinking, you say April fifth, saying hey, there's nothing I was with my dad, I say my day

on his birthday. Not one time I did any trial transprit police ever been tourt these famy Do they ever say where were you three a m? So once they said no, you weren't what your dad? I also remember that I had a traffic stop that day and they win check and it showed that I was something truth. But if like now not at that time it took me, I believe my attorney, for about a week of job of my memory to figure out where did I sleep

at three five him that morning? And I remember it was my grandma's was because my mom changed me that morning and said where are you going to get your dad for his birthday? That's how I was able to put the pieces of a pleasant together. But by that time it was trial, so they looked at it as if, oh,

this is a third alibi? Were no I've given you everywhere I went from April fifteen, So that's how he played it, which is very nefarious because they see that I was trying to tell him everything at the time that this crime was committed at three forty five in the morning. Now we know what you were doing when you were supposedly out shooting somebody who you never knew and don't know and still don't know and never will know. Well,

right before I was shooting a video. If you go on YouTube right now, the song was called Youngerstake, Take a Trip. Lauren Richardson was an associate of the cameraman helped shoot the video. She was also my girlfriend April fourteen, going to table fifteen. She's came to my h grandma talk roughly about nine forty five round ten mclock and we spend the night. We enjoy each other's company. We uh deal with any other boys for the girlfriend. Hello.

My name is Lauren Richardson. I am an Oakland resident and current legal apprentice. Um I entered the field with a lot of motivation from the tragic situation that happened with Pierre Rushing. Um I originally was into video on April fourteen, Pierre went to shoot a video. It's called take a Trip. We were super excited because he had so much support from our neighborhood. Everybody knew he was a great rapper, so when he finally shot the video,

we were super excited. We went back to his grandmother's house afterwards just to kind of recap, and we stayed up all night watching movies, laugh and making plans for the future. We you know, did what couples do late night, and I left early in the morning because I had to take my son to school. And it was weeks after that he kind of disappeared, you know, when somebody else found me and was like, um, you know he's in jail, Like what because I was kind of mad,

you know I was. I thought he ghoes to me, to be honest, so it was no way that he could have committed the crime. I have never felt as powerless as I felt in this situation to express reality and be believed in. You know that this huge power structure for them to be able to create a false reality, Like even with the witness, the witness is not a credible witness, nowhere near as credible as I am. Because I'm not gonna go perjure myself. I'm not gonna risk

my life to keep a killer out of jail. So for me to go up there in front of all of these people and for them to not take my word for it when they had no other evidence, it bothers me to this day. It's a It's a big part of the motivation for me to go into this apprenticeship program because I want to learn how to speak up for other people who can't speak for themselves, because

this has to stop. They ruined an entire family. The idea that we in this country can sendence somebody like you, promising young man with his life ahead of him to fifty years based on the testimony of an admitted crackhead who was up for two days to change his story four times, really should make everybody a little scared. Pierre, can you tell us a little bit about the trial

itself and killing his own camera? When I heard they added on camera, started to kick my feet up and just wait for the trial days and I'm like, even his own camera, I'm I'm going on. I never in a million years imagine that the camera was being low quality or you really can't see anything on the camera. You see a vehicle pull up and it's just it's just grainy, so you can't really see anything. And I remember my heart just dropping because I knew that that

was what was supposed to exonerate me. They had no evidence, no corrob no no physicalness. They have the murder vehicle with twelve fingerprints inside the car and said I got in and out of that car four time, none of the fingerprints mass made. One of the prosecution's witness was a lady by the name of the Carlo Smith, who says she witnessed the her and past Smith for best friends. She had been in that car a week before when the police forrensic Cathologists became the car in every they

found to call this fingerprints in that car. Therefore, when she testified she hadn't been in the car seven days prior to the killing, that means that the car couldn't have possibly been wiped down. And if the car wasn't wipe down, you fund twelve the fourteen fingerprints in that car, And per Robert Green testimony, I got in and out of that car four times, and I killed this guy with no gloves. Why I wear my fingerprints on the car? Second,

if Robert Green is too believe. Why would you ever call me five day light stand a hundred and twenty pounds? Why would you ever change it to five ten hundred and sixty pounds? And that preliminary hearing when the judge allowed me to lead the cour room, they brought Robert Green and they said could completely describe the killer. This guy switched it up to six to two hundred and

twenty pounds. This guy is not to be believed. He was addicted to crack and heron said he had been up for two days off crack and iron had to pensively seven time failings. Third, do you have to call a smith? Another prosecution is with us. I didn't see him. I don't know who that is. Well, yeah, I mean our standard in this country is supposed to be reasonable doubt, and this goes way beyond that standard. I had hoped that, you know, I would I would be exagerated and did

you have proper representation? Now? I went to trial with a public defender, and I went speedy trial. I was arrested in May, I was convicted in August. And the reason I went to speedy trial because I feel like I had nothing odd. I didn't do it. So while when I wait where I see my counting people wait four or five years to fight the case because they're

trying to wait for the bead deal. The thurs Day of trial, I remember the judge saying something like, hey, I know the d is going to give you a deal. She looked to your left. Get a deal because I know that he's going to give you one. And I just remember shaking my head, no, no, no, because why would I take time for something if I didn't do it. They know I'm not seen, so they want to know if a we call in the urban community, if I'm going to snitch, I know a lot of seas. That's

that's the one for two. It's not my job to do the police a job for them, you know. So if I wasn't there, what do you expect me to do? Or maybe it could have been this guy, Maybe could be this guy. If I do that, I'm worse than Robert Green because you were not there and they know that and they feed off that. Yeah, jail house snitches is just sort of become like standard operating procedure. Correct. It's a nightmare to live a nightmare. But that was that was the sum of the trail. Yeah, that is

a nightmare scenario. So the jury goes out. When they came back in, what was that moment like when they actually found guilty of a crime you didn't commit. When they came back with it, it was It was weird because the whole trial, I had twenty to thirty people every single day of my of my trial, friends from

the neighborhood, family, girlfriend, associates. But on that day nobody was in the color room, not even the victim's family, nobody from my frind that dad was just like a sense of loneliness, of sense and like me against the world because you're sitting here convictedmy for a crime that I didn't commit, and I know that you're going to

commit this time. And I couldn't even look back to look in the eyes of my father, my father and my grandmother, and I felt like that was already fat Like why wasn't even the victims family, like where was It was just it's a feeling that I never want to feel again. Marvin, take it back to how you first met Pierre or how you first became aware of his case, and why you chose to get involved in this case. You must get hit with cases all the time.

I actually came to represent Pierre after a different attorney, Stephen Bedrick, who was handling his direct appeal in state court, also filed the habeas corpus petition in the California State Court of Appeal. What is the literal interpretation of habeas corpus. Habeas corpus means to produce the body in Latin, and what that means is that it's an allegation by us

that Pierre is being unlawfully incarcerated. And once I dug into the case and reviewed the evidence in Pierre's case and did some investigation of my own, that very much turned out to be true. Well went wrong here? I think a number of things went wrong, but most critically, there was evidence which could have exonerated Pierre which was not introduced. The only witness in the case, Robert Greene, testified that Pierre was supposedly the person who committed this crime.

That is the only evidence in the case, and in the trial against Pierre, that witness testified that the person who committed this crime was talking on his cell phone mirror minutes before shooting the victim. In this case, Pierre's phone records were available, and that was part of the habeas petition and got him a hearing subsequently, and those phone records established conclusively that Pierre was not talking on his cell phone at the time when the perpetrator was.

And if those records were introduced, I think that it would be a pretty compelling piece of evidence to establish that, in fact, Pierre is not the person responsible for this murder. But they weren't introduced, The jury never heard of them. What about the fingerprint stuff? How did they manage to get around that? That seems like that could have been enough on its own. How did he not leave his fingerprints?

Is he a ghost? Well? The fingerprint evidence was introduced by way of a stipulation for the evidence technician who actually gathered the latent fingerprints from the car that was

used in the homicide. That witness did not testify. Rather, Pierre's trial attorney chose to have that evidence admitted by way of an agreement with the prosecutor simply the conclusion that Pierre's fingerprints were not in fact recovered from that car, And had that witness been called, it would have led to another important piece which was not introduced and not

known to the jury. That evidence technician also collected DNA from that car swabbed all of the areas of that car where the killer sat just before the murder occurred. In addition, there was a cigarette but that was recovered from the floorboard of that car, which was also swabbed for DNA. That DNA evidence was not tested in time for Pierre's trial, and that was also the subject of

his subsequent Abeas petition. So what happened was after we obtained an evidentiary hearing in state court to attempt to prove years innocence. As I started reviewing the case materials, I realized that this DNA evidence existed which would completely exonerate him, and no one had tested it. So there's a procedure under California law that allows the convicted individual to ask the court to now have that evidence tested

because it would prove that he's innocent. The government opposed our efforts to have that evidence tested, and ultimately the judge in this case refused to allow us to test that evidence. I then appealed that refusal, and the Court of Appeal refused to allow us to test that evidence. Why is it that they wouldn't want to have the DNA evidence in the case tested if they're so confident that,

in fact, he's the perpetrator. Because I never can understand in any case, especially in the case as serious as this one, a murder case, why they wouldn't want to have every you know, stone turned over and have every piece of evidence tested so that they can find out not only that in this case Pierre didn't do it, but they could find out who actually did. Marvin Yolanda Washington and Patrick Smith are pivotal players in this whole wrangful conviction. Can you explain their role in what went

wrong here? Sure? Of course Pat Smith was a charged codefendant in the case at the time of Pierre's trial, so he did not testify at the trial. He had his fifth Amendment right. But after Pierre's trial was long over and after Patrick Smith resolved his part of the case for accessory affter the fact, he then signed in

affidavit which helped Pierre get an evidentiary hearing. He indicated both in his affidavit as well as in his testimony at the evidentiary hearing that his drug dealer is a man who goes by the name of c and that individual was not Pierre Rushing. Pat Smith at the hearing refused to name that individual because he was afraid for

his life. One of the people who was in that apartment was a woman by the name of Yolande Washington, and she also did not testify a trial, but after Pierre was convicted, she signed an affid David under penalty of perjury, indicating that she, of course, having been in that apartment, knew who she was. She obviously knew who Andre Morris was, and what she said in her affid David was that Pierre Rushing is not the drug dealer who shot and killed Mr. Taylor. Pierre Rushing is not C.

But that's not all. Indeed, Yolande Washington went so far as to identify who that person was. Now, before we get into this, let me make one thing clear, which is that Pierre does not know the identity of the perpetrator of this homicide. Yolanda Washington, in her affid David did name that individual who goes by the nickname C. In fact, his first name is his name is and of course it would make perfect sense that he would go by the nickname C because his name is Pierre Rushing.

Does not have a C in his name, and she has never been Pierre's nickname because Pierre is not the person responsible for this killing. That affidavit was part of what enabled Pierre to get a hearing in superior court. Unfortunately, Miss Washington was a homeless individual at that time, and my investigator was essentially unable to locate her to get her to testifying court. So I filed a motion essentially asking that her affidavit be considered because she was unavailable,

and that request was denied. Wow, it's pretty courageous, even after the fact that these two people both were willing to put their own lives at risk to identify someone who they know is a killer. And I think that speaks volumes to the veracity of their statements to me.

And I don't mean to say it like it's because of the social climate that we have going on in your klinded station right now, but growing up, our voice felt I could spend them against us, not because I grow up in an age and the police, but I just watch how they need those that look like me. Here, as we're talking about a guy give a description on April thirties of a red hat, and you see me on the dark saying, well, hey, that's a guy wearing a red hat. Let me stop him. And now my

whole life is his spending in a sparter. Why not a tread of physical evidence links me to this crime, and if it could happen to me, it can't happen to anybody. Yeah, and I'm glad you brought that up.

I mean, we you know, every day there's more information coming out, and I'm grateful that the public is starting to have a really heightened awareness to the fact that black people, It's just put it right out there, are so much more are likely to be victimized by not just police brutality, but by rawful convictions, by rawful prosecutions, being forced into taking plea bargains two things they didn't do.

The whole system is stacked rawful convictions, though, do happen to people from all races, all nationalities, all different creeds, all different religions. I mean, we've had people on the show from every walk of life. I mean, you can take the case of Bryan Ferguson in a two thousand one Columbus, Missouri killing. He was wrongfully convicted, and he's a white man, you know, what I mean, like wrawerful convictions don't have a skin color. I mean, it's just

usually what I'm going through. I witness misidentifications on valid forensic science, false confessions, police or prosecutor misconduct. This is a slew of things on why rawful convictions happened. And then there's just laziness too. It's like, oh, we got a guy with a red hat, good enough, you know

what I mean. But the idea that the justice system at every level, now we see it on video of how the system treats people like yourself, like George Floyd, like so many others, as expendable, disposable, and yet I mean there are very very real consequences. That's why we're on the phone with you from prison now, or you and I might be working together on a record instead of Pierre. What would you want people to know about you and what would you want them to do if

you could give them an action? Stem Um, I would want them to know that could be your son, I could be your brother, I could be your nephew, I could be your cousin. I could be your friend. Um, I'm innocent. If you have any doubt in my innocence, I would actually just think on these key points. If I wasn't innocent, with ulty, person would push for DNA testing up the materials that were saw out of the vehicle.

If I wasn't innocent, what guilty man would plash for the enhancement of the of the video if I wasn't innocent, or man, I'm going to push for the phone records. I'm innocent, I didn't commit this crime. I have nothing to do with this crime. I would ask that you just look inside your art and find the empathy and the compassion to sign a petition that my family is organized the Justice for Peer Rushing to Change dot org.

And I would ask that you stand up, that you would reach out to the local authorities, your local police department, const legislation, and just trying to try to make change. So again, that's Justice for Pierre Rushing un change dot org. As the petition will also have a link in this episode description, so you can sign a petition there. Please, everyone go and sign it. I already did. I hope

you'll join me and let's bring him home. And now I want to introduce what our listeners have come to know is my favorite part of the show and I think a lot for a lot of them. It's true too. Um. This is a part of the show where first of all, I thank you for being on the show and sharing your experience. Hopefully it will make a difference in the lives of others, Um, and the difference in your case as well. So thank you again, Pierre for being here.

And now I'm gonna kick back in my chair, turn my microphone off and just basically shut up and listen. So closing arguments, we're going to go first to Marvin Lieu and then we're gonna hear from Pierre. What has happened to Pierre is a systemic failure. These are problems which are built into the legal system that need to be fixed on the systemic level, you know, in terms

of next steps, you know. Fortunately, uh, Pierre continues to be represented by Bob Bellis in his ongoing federal habeas matter, and I wish them the best and I hope that ultimately through the legal system they're they're able to generate

some relief and review for Pierre. But what I will say is that in light of the failures of the system relating to Pierre over and over again, what I would say is that this venue is an opportunity to go outside of and beyond the legal system to attempt to find a way to free Pierre from from this

wrongful conviction. And one of the things that can be done outside of the legal system is to put pressure on the government to either test at DNA evidence or provide it to Pierre's attorneys so that they can test it for him. Even though they have resisted that and actively opposed that throughout these proceedings, nonetheless they retain the power to change their minds and agree, and they are the Alameda County District Attorney's office and the californ On

Your Attorney General's office. So whether they're forced to do that through some legal proceeding or whether they agree to do that by virtue of public and political pressure, that is something that that can be done and that they continue to have the power to do. Pierre. The mic is yours for closing arguments. Thank you. I would like to uh first off saying thank you on behalf of me in behalf of my family to a few people first, starting with you, Jason Flaner. You creating this platform that

is reaching millions and millions of people. Um, right, now we're living in a climate where a lot of people are making it a black and a white issue right now. Yes, black lives do matter, but it's not a black and a white issue because they have a lot of people that are Caucasian race that are standing up and you are are one of us. All. Thank you. I thank Marvin lou for fighting and champion in my innocence. I like to thank Gloria Saudi. I'd like to thank Josh

Swindle for helping my family out. And I'd also like to thank you came when she's doing for justice reform. And I'd like to thank the Innocence Project and those that are are are standing up for these carss. And finally I'd like to just also thank my father. They tried to make my father and try to transfers look like a guy who was trying to persuade witnesses, you know. And to the other fifteen, the driver of this case,

Patrick Smith, came in. He said, you know, I took them guys to do that stuff, and I was a part of that. And I can't live with myself knowing that a man is doing life for something that I did. He's not the guy. And when They asked him, why are you coming forward now? He said, because his father reached out to me, and they tried to make my father look like like like he was persuaded, when all he was doing it was fighting for his son. What have you done if your son was arrested to some

men and do you would fight for him? So you know they're gonna throw smoking mirrors and try to make it seem like this and try to make it seem like that. I don't care about the smoking mirror. I don't care about the facts. And the fact is I didn't commit this time. With that being said, you know, it's a lot going on right now. So I just asked for people to just educate yourselves on these type of situations. They could happen to anybody here. I was wrapping,

so I was attending the Laney in Marrion College. I didn't do too good. I ended up dropping out, but I tried. You know, I don't know a lot of people that come where I come from not even try to go to college, let alone do it while they're doing music. I was trying to make a change in my life. I didn't grow up squeaky clean. I would be the first one to tell you, like I told anybody,

I've had a check pass. That doesn't define me, that doesn't make me a killer, that doesn't make me anything but a man that grew up looking at something that's wrong, believing that it was right. There is no physical for friends and to give it is that links me to this crime. So if you need any reason to to fight for this cause, just look inside the case. Pull the case up. You're gonna see listen. Is an atrocity

and it could happen to anybody, anybody. They say in the Wikipedia at two point three million prisoners, like a hundred twenty prowfully convicted people in prison. Something is wrong with that. Likely there's something terribly wrong with that. Don't forget to give us a fantastic review wherever you get your podcasts. It really helps. And I'm a proud donor to the Innocence Project and I really hope you'll join me in supporting this very important cause and helping to

prevent future wrongful convictions. Go to Innocence Project dot org to learn how to donate and get involved. I'd like to thank our production team, Connor Hall and Kevin wardis the music in the show is by three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction and on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction Podcast. Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flam is a production of Lava for Good Podcasts in association with Signal Company Number One.

The Woman was Worth