California Penal Code

So no, that's a, that's a great question.

So under California penal code, there's a, a penal code refers to the criminal code of, of justice here in California.

And, It's there's a that count that charge relates to false imprisonment.

So that's blocking someone's movements using either force or fear, confining them to a place and blocking somebody in with your vehicle in that manner.

It's not intelligent.

So she blocks him in.

That's penal code section 236. when you go and you proceed to follow someone and you're riding their tail like that and you're trying to do it for the purposes of harassment or to create the sense of fear or otherwise to impress upon this person that you're controlling their movement or you're trying to push them away from something in that manner, It is arguably stalking under California Penal Code Section 646.9.

So you have these two penal code sections that are in play, whether or not she was right about Mr. Bridges being an ICE agent, which she was fundamentally wrong about.

In a response to the recent surge of pen register claims in California courts, the governor recently signed Senate Bill 690 into law.

Now this bill amends the California Penal Code to eliminate the private right of action for pen register and trap and trace claims.

These website tracking class actions that have plagued businesses that do commerce in California have relied heavily on the statute, and they allege that the website tracking tools, such as cookies and pixels, collect user information without the user's consent or with court orders authorizing the collection of that info.

This bill provides that those types of claims may now only be brought by the California Attorney General.

Keep in mind that California is still a very plaintiff friendly jurisdiction.

Whether your business is located in California or not, Unless you're blocking traffic from California residents, you are still exposed to the risk of wiretapping or tracking litigation.

And again, these two particular sections of the California Penal Code can now only be pursued by the California Attorney General.

But that doesn't mean they won't, and it doesn't mean private litigants can't find other avenues to proceed.

If that's not the most fucked up upside-down thing you've ever heard in your life, what is? Makes me sick.

Where is the justice for Tom Hawks? Where is the justice for Jackie Hawks? Where is the justice for John Jarvi? Where's the justice for their kid, Ryan Hawks, who has to wake up every single day knowing his father and stepmom plunged to the bottom of the ocean while the sick fuck who put them there is living comfortably, getting elective surgeries, taking advantage of every single loophole in the California Penal Code? It's horseshit.

Absolute 100% grade A unadulterated horseshit.

But this is what happens [clears throat] when a culture loses its moral compass, when we stop honoring the victim and start worshiping the criminal, when a nobody who stood in the background of a kid's television show for five seconds can use the veneer of Hollywood to trick decent people, slaughter them in cold blood, and then manipulate the woke mind virus legal system to get whatever the hell he wants behind bars.

A very interesting gentleman.

This is a relatively new California Penal Code section, 1172.1, that actually allows a trial court to recall a previously imposed felony sentence and resentence the individual.

Now, we have a gentleman who I hold in the highest regard who was the prosecutor in this case, particularly egregious behavior on the part of a man who was involved with a group of people and a number of armed robberies, and ultimately... very clearly showed his intent and he killed, he executed the victim.

So this

Remember, Chesterfield is America's best cigarette buy.

The two suspects, Peter Ellis and Virgil Russell, were taken to the main jail and booked in for violation of Section 211 of the California Penal Code.

After that, the officers from San Diego, Frank and I, discussed the plan for finding the stolen jewels.

It was agreed that I would go into the office building with the suspect, Virgil Russell.

Wilber Carl Flicker, also known as Wilbur French, was found guilty on three felony warrants charging forgery.

He was sentenced to the state prison as prescribed by Section 470 of the California Penal Code for a period of one to 14 years.

You have just heard Dragnet, the authentic story of your police force in action, and starring Jack Webb.

A presentation of the United States Armed Forces Radio Service.

This didn't sit well with another self-described rationalist, Scott Alexander, who took a break from comparing AI safetyists to Jesus to challenge Pinker to a debate anywhere, anytime, even wagering thousands of dollars for whoever wins said debate Pinker declined this offer in a piece titled An Open Letter to Scott Alexander, which prompted Scott to write an open letter to Steven Pinker, within which he clarified his debate offer, saying, "I didn't propose a debate in order to seek truth.

I proposed it because under California Penal Code, it's illegal for me to challenge you to a duel." Cool.

So several folks on the timeline weren't loving these personal attacks from Scott.

The writer Sarah Haider wrote, "Never lost respect for someone so fast.

But I didn't propose a debate in order to seek truth.

I proposed it because, under California Penal Code Section 415-1, it's illegal for me to challenge you to a duel.

I think your public writing on this topic has been dishonorable.

Out of obligation, I will respond to the meaty arguments that you have set out for me.

CIX, we made it, boys.

California sent us a cease and desist for an unsanctioned human versus humanoid robot cage fight.

Hey, @Grok, explain business and professions code Section 18625 and how a robot versus human fight would not qualify as a match by their own definition." End quote.

Scott Alexander could resist the bait, but probably should have, part two of two this week.