Premeditated Assault, Obstruction of Justice, and Property Damage Charges
Regarding the return of property, Mr. Angkarn and Mr. Phut were dispatched by Mr. January, with Mr. Sao providing a firearm and driving them to Mr. January’s residence at Mr. Athit’s house, accompanied by Mr. Angkarn and Mr. Phut ascending to the house, finding Mr. January asleep, Mr. Angkarn raising the firearm to shoot but fearing the presence of Mr. Toey, he did not shoot. Mr. Phut then raised the firearm intending to shoot Mr. January himself. Mr. Athit, who had been observing from a distance, feeling sympathy for Mr. January, who had previously been a close friend, ran in and deflected the firearm. The gunshot discharged. The bullet did not strike Mr. January, but struck a bamboo structure beneath the house belonging to Mr. 1 , causing it to be destroyed. What offenses, if any, did Mr. Athit, Mr. Angkarn, Mr. Phut, and Mr. Sao commit? Mr. Athit was the person who instigated the assault by premeditating the action. Answer: Mr. Athit is liable under Section 289 of the Criminal Code. The fact that Mr. Athit deflected the firearm, preventing the bullet from striking Mr. January, constitutes an obstruction of justice as stipulated in Section 88. Mr. Athit is therefore only liable according to the provisions in Section 84, paragraph , which carries a penalty of one-third of Section 289. 1. Mr. Angkarn raised his hand to shoot, constituting an act of attempted murder premeditatedly, as stipulated in the Criminal Code. However, he regretted and abstained, therefore he is not liable under Sections 289, 80. 2. Mr. Phut fired the firearm, constituting a complete offense. However, the act did not materialize, and he is liable for attempted murder premeditatedly, as stipulated in the Criminal Code. The bullet discharging and striking the bamboo structure causing its destruction is not punishable, carrying a penalty of two-thirds of Section 289, 80, based on damage to property due to the absence of intent to cause damage. Mr. Sao provided assistance and facilitated the action, constituting him as an accomplice in the crime, as stipulated in the Criminal Code. He is liable for two-thirds of Section 289.