Witness Testimony and Prosecution’s Right to Call Witnesses
The factual account derived from the investigative statement of a criminal case, the defendant, Mr. , is accused of jointly deceiving a taxi driver to take him to a secluded location. Investigation of Mr. K. and Mr. C. was conducted, and a knife was used to extort cash from Mr. C. in an amount . The Prosecutor then filed charges against Mr. and Mr. C. for robbery. Subsequently, Mr. C. was brought in to testify as the first witness. It is further established that, in order to strengthen the evidence, in a subsequent evidentiary hearing of the defendant, Mr. , 1 testimony was given, and Mr. B., who had previously testified as a witness for the Prosecution, was also called. 3.
It is ordered to determine whether the parties in this case properly introduced Mr. B. as a witness, and if so, why. Although Mr. B. was previously a defendant in a prior case, and the Prosecutor dismissed the charges, he is no longer in the position of a defendant. Therefore, the Prosecutor is permitted to call witnesses without violating Section 232 of the Thai Penal Code. Although Mr. C. was not interrogated, the law does not require the Prosecutor to have interrogated a witness before before calling him to testify. The law merely prohibits the Prosecutor from filing charges without conducting an investigation. Regarding Mr. 's introduction of Mr. B. as a witness, he is permitted to do so as well, as there is no law prohibiting a former defendant from introducing witnesses for the Prosecution.