Can a prosecutor reasonably challenge the peremptory decision of a jury?

The record here suggests grounds for the prosecutor to have reasonably challenged these jurors. The trial judge, "who had performed much of and observed the remainder of the voir dire, [and thus] was in the best position to determine under `all the relevant circumstances' of the case" whether a prima facie showing existed (People v. Box, supra, 23 Cal.4th at p. 1189, 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 69, 5 P.3d 130), mentioned reasons as to two of the jurors. The court noted that these reasons did not warrant a challenge for cause, but peremptory challenges need not be based on grounds for a challenge for cause. (People v. Jones, supra, 17 Cal.4th at p. 294, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 793, 949 P.2d 890.) So far as we can review the court's reasons on the cold record, the record supports them. Defendant has a different view of the significance of these jurors' answers and courtroom statements, but we see no basis on which to overturn the trial court's determinations.