Investigate by torturing the accused people were officially charged with an offense against God. Or to the country are not treated fairly. The law treats the defendant is guilty before the court to judge him. Contrary to evidence law in Thailand today. The court treats everyone is innocent until the courts decide whether he is guilty. On the first floor, but that the accused is guilty. The formal request by the defendant pleaded guilty, but good. The defendant pleaded not simply surrender to the metropolitan court. Or any other court of competent jurisdiction to investigate by torturing the accused was investigate by torturing the accused is penalizing for justice. During consideration of Tralakar Tralakar authorized punitive beatings or torture, hammering nails, press one's temple defendant in various ways unless the defendant to plead. If Tralakar not totally convinced that the defendant has pleaded guilty. Or that the defendant did not squeal co-perpetrator. It has the power to punish a defendant for another penalty. Although the defendant confessed that he is guilty then. Investigate by torturing the accused has both advantages and disadvantages. That is a good result The culprit is often confess guilt and squeal partisan co-perpetrator. And make people fear the law of the land. What's wrong with the current laws that allow criminal offenses have been denied justice. The culprit is lying to the court's jurisdiction or not. No penalties were in any danger. This is why the criminal mind. Do not fear the courts as before. However, investigate by torturing the accused may have a negative effect on the miss. The defendant may be innocent. But I must confess I was not tortured, was sentenced to death or were executed there. It is also a channel for court officials. Corruption, extortion with the other defendants.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..