Re: [tips_and_tricks] Help on having to pay to defend myself
CCP 170.1 is for disqualification for cause. 170.6 is the peremptory challenge and can only be used once if my memory serves me correctly.
"A truth's initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was believed. When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker, a raving lunatic." -- Dresden James
From: WW011@... [mailto:WW011@...]
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Help on having to pay to defend myself
Fire the Judge
In California I believe its CCP 170.1
Might be Different code different state for PREEMPTORY CHALLENGE
- On Jan 3, 2005, at 9:00 AM, WW011@... wrote:
> Fire the JudgeI think you meant "peremptory". Called a peremptory challenge, this
> In California I believe its CCP 170.1
> Might be Different code different state for PREEMPTORY CHALLENGE
right may usually only be exercised once by a party in any given case,
whereas a challenge for cause may be used whenever a cause arises. I
find it better to reserve my one and only peremptory challenge for when
no other cause is available.
California Constitution Article XX, section 3 trumps any statute.
I guess you didn't see my message regarding the lack of judges in
California, due to the above article.
It would be a mistake to attempt to fire an impersonator using either
challenge, since making the challenge assumes that the person to be
removed is indeed a judge. Why would you make a person a judge in your
eyes if they refused to take the required oath of office?
I do not find it advantageous to vest mere neighbors who are willing to
commit impersonation of an officer with the powers of the office they
are impersonating. Why would you?