Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Dr. L.:
Now I am dizzy. LOL
On the California Law Page, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html ,
there are 29 different sections each dealing with different aspects of
the law. Family, Civil, Penal, Vehicle, etc.
I did find out that it didn't matter if it was a family law, civil law
or whatever it could be used in a felony case. In other words just
because a law is a civil law, does not mean that it can't be brought
into a felony murder case.
Is that what you mean. :)
That basically is why I am so confused by this decision. They are
saying under the family code that a fetus is not a child, and then they
are turning around and saying under the civil code that a fetus is a
child. I realize that they are using the definition that best suits
their purpose in making the law they are referring to, however it can't
be two ways, IMO. Either the fetus is a child or it isn't.
Sue
>
> You don't seem confused to me, Sue, you seem modest. But HERE is
> confused: in the Ward criminal case they seem to rely on Civil Code,
> that is Family Law code, do they not? I am not familiar with California
> Law, but hereabouts Family Law is considered civil code -- and it can
> be used in conjunction with penal code, which conjoining, however, does
> not change its character. So THAT's confused. :) :) L.
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
