Bangkok Legal Service

Article 6. Mr. K. sustained grievous injuries during interrogation. Mr. K. admitted guilt to the prosecution, alleging attempted murder of another person. He retracted his admission before the court, stating that he did not commit the offense as charged against him. The individual who used the firearm to shoot Mr. B. was Mr. C. However, at the time of the incident, Mr. K. happened to be present. Mr. K.’s admission during interrogation was due to coercion by the investigating officers. Mr. K. asserted himself as a witness and provided testimony before the court. Mr. N., who Mr. K. claimed was a defense witness, provided testimony. Mr. N.’s admission during interrogation was due to coercion, and the court evaluated Mr. K.’s testimony and evidence, finding that the testimony of the plaintiff’s witnesses supported the charges. Consequently, Mr. K. was sentenced as follows: Whether Mr. K. and Mr. N. are liable is addressed below.

Mr. K.’s use of a firearm to shoot Mr. B., while claiming to be a witness providing testimony stating that he did not use a firearm to shoot Mr. B., was a false statement. This false testimony and fabricated evidence constitutes a false lead in the investigation. Even in a criminal case, the testimony of the defendant may be disregarded, but if the defendant provides false testimony as a witness, Section 172 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 177, Paragraph 2 of the same Code (3 points) apply. This also constitutes a violation of Section 177, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2 points) for knowingly leading false evidence in a criminal proceeding.

The admission of Mr. K. was due to coercion. Regarding Mr. N., the aforementioned testimony was false but not material to the case. It does not constitute a violation of Section 177, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code, nor does it constitute a violation of Section 180 of the Penal Code for knowingly leading false evidence (2 points).

Mr. K. owed a debt of 20,000 baht to Mr. Kong and Mrs. Kong.