Section 226/2 — Bad Character and Prior Bad Acts Evidence
Texte légal (original thaï)
ห้ามมิให้ศาลรับฟังพยานหลักฐานที่เกี่ยวกับการกระทำความผิดครั้งอื่นๆ
หรือความประพฤติในทางเสื่อมเสียของจำเลย
เพื่อพิสูจน์ว่าจำเลยเป็นผู้กระทำความผิดในคดีที่ถูกฟ้องเว้นแต่พยานหลักฐานอย่างหนึ่งอย่างใดดังต่อไปนี้
(๑)
พยานหลักฐานที่เกี่ยวเนื่องโดยตรงกับองค์ประกอบความผิดของคดีที่ฟ้อง
(๒)
พยานหลักฐานที่แสดงถึงลักษณะ วิธี หรือรูปแบบเฉพาะในการกระทำความผิดของจำเลย
(๓)
พยานหลักฐานที่หักล้างข้อกล่าวอ้างของจำเลยถึงการกระทำ
หรือความประพฤติในส่วนดีของจำเลยความในวรรคหนึ่งไม่ห้ามการนำสืบพยานหลักฐานดังกล่าว
เพื่อให้ศาลใช้ประกอบดุลพินิจในการกำหนดโทษหรือเพิ่มโทษ
traduction anglaise
The court shall not admit evidence relating to other offenses or to discreditable conduct of the defendant for the purpose of proving that the defendant committed the offense charged, except for any of the following evidence: (1) evidence directly connected with the elements of the offense charged; (2) evidence showing the specific nature, method, or pattern of the defendant's commission of the offense; (3) evidence rebutting the defendant's assertion as to good acts or good conduct on his part. The provisions of paragraph one do not prohibit the introduction of such evidence for the court to consider in exercising its discretion to determine or increase the penalty.
Cette traduction anglaise est fournie à titre indicatif uniquement et n'a pas encore été vérifiée de manière définitive ; référez-vous toujours à l'original thaï.
Annotation de l'entreprise
Section 226/2 sits in Book 5, Title on evidence, General Principles chapter, and codifies the character-evidence exclusionary rule for criminal trials. It bars propensity reasoning: the court may not infer guilt from the defendant's other offenses or bad reputation. The three exceptions mirror the common-law categories of res gestae, modus operandi (signature) evidence, and rebuttal of good-character evidence opened by the defense. The final paragraph preserves the use of such material at the sentencing stage, where propensity and record are legitimately relevant. It operates alongside Section 227 on the weighing of evidence.
Pourquoi cela est important en pratique
For an accused, this section is a shield: it lets the defense object when the prosecution tries to lead evidence of past charges or a bad reputation to color the current trial. The exceptions are read strictly, and evidence that only shows the defendant is the type of person to offend is inadmissible on the question of guilt, though it can resurface at sentencing. If you are facing charges and worried about how your record may be used, understanding how a Thai criminal trial runs helps you and your lawyer plan objections in advance.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3885/2563 (2020)
Prior judgments and pending counts a defendant asked to have sentences run consecutively can serve as evidence of a specific method or pattern of offending under Section 226/2 paragraph one (2).
In a money-laundering conspiracy tied to a large drug network, the court admitted evidence of the defendants' other cases as showing the specific pattern of their conduct, and held it could be used to support proof of the offense charged under Section 226/2 paragraph one (2).
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2789/2558 (2015)
Evidence of a defendant's discreditable prior conduct that never led to any prosecution is inadmissible under Section 226/2 paragraph one, and its use weakens the prosecution's case.
The prosecution pointed to the defendant's earlier car rental as bad conduct, but no case had ever been brought over it. The court held this was inadmissible discreditable-conduct evidence under Section 226/2 paragraph one, leaving the theft charge in reasonable doubt and the acquittal stood.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1362/2561 (2018)
Section 226/2 bars other-offense evidence only when used to prove the defendant committed the charged offense; where the charge itself is forging and using a forged document, the relevant proof is not caught by the rule.
The defendants were charged with forging and using a forged will. The court held that Section 226/2 prohibits other-offense evidence only when offered to prove guilt of the charge, and the evidence relating to the forgery itself fell outside that prohibition.
Décisions sélectionnées avec numéros de dossier vérifiés dans la base de données de la Cour suprême. Les versions anglaises sont des traductions éditoriales réalisées par le cabinet à des fins d'étude.
Foire aux questions
Can the prosecution tell the court about my past convictions during trial?
Generally no. Under Section 226/2, evidence of other offenses or bad character cannot be used to prove you are guilty of the current charge, though it may be considered when the court decides on the penalty.
When is evidence of a defendant's other conduct allowed?
Only in three situations: when it connects directly to the elements of the offense, when it shows a distinctive method or pattern of offending, or when it rebuts the defendant's own claim of good character.