 If you have got 7 million Californians who took this position, 70 judges, as you pointed out, and this long history that you have described, why in this case did you present but one witness on the subject? One witness. And I think it fair to say that his testimony was equivocal in some respects. Blackstone, your honor, said that there are two great relations in private life. First that of husband and wife. I don't mean to be flipped, but Blackstone didn't testify. Kingsley Davis didn't testify. What testimony in this case supports the proposition? But, your honor, you don't have to have evidence for this from these authorities. This is in the cases themselves. I don't have to have evidence. You don't have to have evidence of this point if one court after another. Mr. Blankenhorn, one of the instructions that the court gives to the jury when an expert witness testifies is to consider the witness's background, training, and all the other evidence in the case. And that other evidence includes the demeanor of the witness. So I would urge you to pay close attention to Mr. Boyce's questions and to answer them directly, succinctly. So bear that in mind. Yes, sir, I will. That's yes, no, or I don't know. I know the answer. I cannot answer you correctly if the only words I'm allowed to choose from is yes or no. I can give you my answer in a very brief sentence. If you know the answer, why don't you share it with us? Well, I would be happy to, but he's only permitting me to give yes and no. I cannot do that and be accurate. He is giving you three choices. Yes, no, I don't know. But I do know. I do know the answer. Then is it yes or is it no? Your honor, I can answer the question, but I cannot give an accurate answer if the only two choices I have are yes and no. If you give me a sentence, I can answer it. One sentence is all I'm asking for. All right, let's take a sentence. One sentence. Can you ask me the question again, please?