Tag Archives: justice

Law[less] and [Dis]order

Standard

I love watching Law&Order. Husband, not so much — but really, I am the one with the remote control in the house so he has to deal with whatever crap he thinks he’s watching. I’ve been watching Law&Order since I was in high school and old enough to understand the awesomeness of the program.

Of course I understand, that for some people it is not more than usual crime drama. For me it is more than that. It is more than CSI where a group of people are sweeping the crime scene, trying to solve the puzzle. With Law&Order, the puzzle is usually not difficult, nor unique. It is usually just a common crime done by common people. But that’s not all it is about.

The original Law and Order has this very famouse narration in the beginning of the show:

In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate, yet equally important, groups: the police, who investigate crime; and the district attorneys, who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories.

Got it? That’s at least the idea of how the criminal justice system works in the US.

How about Indonesia?

I’ve been thinking about this a lot since the trial for Jessica started weeks ago. The official trial, that is. Months ago, I have talked about this, and I have sensed how scarily flawed our criminal justice system — that is, if we based our judgement on this trial. How even the judge seems to “nudge nudge wink wink” with the persecutor, ignoring the fact that this case has not got enough evidence to go on a trial.

Yes. Of course… I have watched enough Law&Order to understand that there is something called “Circumstantial Evidence”. Unlike CSI who are working with hard evidence such as DNA, fingerprint, fibres, and blood spatters, the detectives in L&O also works with circumstantial evidences. What are they? Motives, opportunities, and alibi, and the like.

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:L%26OUK_poster.jpg - I was going to post Jessica's photo, but really... if she's proven innocent, I don't want to be responsible to be one of those people who immortalise this trauma for her. So... How about Law and Order UK instead? -

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:L%26OUK_poster.jpg – I was going to post Jessica’s photo, but really… if she’s proven innocent, I don’t want to be responsible to be one of those people who immortalise this trauma for her. So… How about Law and Order UK instead? –

However… “She looks dodgy” is not a circumstantial evidence, it is an opinion. “Her attitude is unusal” is not a circumstantial evidence either. It might lead the investigation to find evidence, but opinion is opinion and SHOULD NEVER EVER be used as an evidence. Circumstantial evidence could be: “oh she’s got a connection to someone who can get her cyanide”, or “this is the evidence that she will gain something from the death of the other girl”, or “this is the evidence of the relationship in the past, and here are some witnesses who heard her said something about killing this woman”. Strong circumstantial evidence.

What I saw in the trial of Jessica was criminalisation. The fact that the case is so high profile, and the eyes of the media are all on it, it would be embarrassing for the persecutor to ditch the case and admit that there’s no case against this woman. It reminds me of the trial of the former KPK director Antasari Azhar.

At that time there were NO evidence linking him to the case. It was clear that the evidences were planted, and even the circumstantial evidence were made up. The witnesses disappeared after the trial, so that nobody could prove that they have committed perjury. Even the family of the victim begged the court to continue the investigation and release Antasari as they KNOW that it wasn’t him who killed their beloved one.

But in the end, they brought him down anyway.

And, hey! If it worked for a high profile individual like Antasari Azhar — a man with such a status, well known as someone who’s always in the right side of the law, why can’t it work to Jessica? She’s just a young woman, visiting home to see family and friends — maybe for Chinese New Year — oh and minority too. Should be easy, isn’t it?

But if it worked to Antasari Azhar and Jessica, two high profile cases in the country, how do you know that there are no cases like them that is not covered by the media? How do you know that if one day you are so unfortunate being caught up in a criminal case, and you’re innocent… How do you know that you could get a fair trial? How do you know that you can rely on your evidences, alibis, and innocence? How do you know that things would be alright if you do everything right?

You don’t.

http://www.metrotvnews.com/embed/0k8gEPob

To close my entry today, I will give you a video… The video is a fragment from Metro TV’s program NSI (News Story Insight) presented by Aviani Malik about the victims of wrong persecution that you might have never heard before.

Prost

Advertisements

Law and Justice

Standard

Mirna’s Case is now elevated to the next level as the Police Investigator has decided to change the status of one of the witnesses to ‘suspect’. J, the woman who has been under scrutiny for her so called suspicious attitude in front of the media was arrested and now detained.

J is now charge for a first degree murder — pembunuhan berencana or “planned murder” if it’s freely translated to Bahasa Indonesia. So, according to the police, J is responsible for (1) plan, and intention to murder, (2) execute the murder — successfully.

Many people are happy with this arrest, which is totally understandable as it is very much unsettling to have a murderer roaming around the city. However, there are many people believes that this arrest is premature, or some might say that it is unlawful. There is no physical evidence which link this woman to the murder itself — apart from her being in the crime scene.

There are at least three experts who disagreed with this arrest. No. None of them said that they think J is innocent, but they disagreed with how the police and the media has drive the public opinion into believing that she is guilty. Even with big media such as our national tv station, inviting the “body language experts”, saying in front of the audience that J’s smile means she’s lying and so on and so forth.

As a linguist, and a communication academia, I can say that what these experts said was totally and utterly rubbish.

These are other experts, which according my own opinion are worth listening. Listen to the logic, and if you have it, use your brain too…

1. Asep Iwan Iriawan
Asep Iwan Iriawan is a former judge and now an expert in judicial system. He believed that there is no link between J and the murder. Yes it is true that J was there when Mirna drank the coffee, and J was the first one who arrived at the scee. J threw away the trousers she wore that day, and she seemed so calm and smile in front of media. She is definitely suspicious.
But none of the think mentioned above — according to Asep, showed that J was the one who put cyanide in Mirna’s coffee. Even the CCTV — which is supposed to be the strongest evidence didn’t show that.
Asep even said as far as: “If I was the judge… with those [so-called] evidence, I’ll let her go”.
http://www.jpnn.com/read/2016/01/31/353935/Seribu-Alat-Bukti-juga-Percuma-
http://www.suara.com/news/2016/01/30/181024/ketika-dua-pakar-dan-mantan-hakim-berdebat-soal-kasus-mirna

2. Reza Indragiri Amriel
I haven’t heard about him before this case, but apparently he is a Forensic Psychologist. So, I trust him better than a hypnotherapist in this particular case. What does a hypnotherapist know about a murder case anyway… sigh. This country is sick.
As an expert Reza didn’t think that J is the murderer. He argued that cyanide is not a kind of poison anyone could acquire easily in Indonesia. Metro TV tried to do it on NSI programme, by sending some investigative journalist to buy cyanide from chemist and chemical store, with no avail. It is almost impossible for J, a girl who lives in australia to know her way in the city to get cyanide.
And, he’s also believes that any “body language experts” who jumped into a conclusion that when someone blinks it means that they’re lying, or if someone smiles it means that they’re hiding something… are bulshitting the public. I agree with him in this.
http://www.suara.com/news/2016/01/30/132934/psikolog-forensik-kasus-mirna-pembunuhan-berencana-salah-sasaran

3. Heru Susetyo
This is also the first time I heard about him, so I am not sure about his credibility. Apparently he is a Victimology Experts from Universitas Indonesia. Still a better credibility than a hypnotherapist in this particular murder case.
He said that the police investigators are reckless in confirming J as the suspect. He believed that as this case became big and that the media has blow this up to the surface, the police felt more and more pressure. The drama of this murder case has driven the police to a rush conclusion, while indeed in fact there’s no physical evidence linking J to anything.
He believes that J has been victimised both by the media and police officer because the society pushed them to solve this quickly.
http://www.suara.com/news/2016/01/30/145519/pakar-viktimologi-polisi-terlalu-buru-buru-tetapkan-tersangka

Mirna’s father, was the loudest to fight for justice for her daughter. It is completely understandable for a father to do that when his daughter died in such a way. But it has to be understood that he is emotional too — he might not be able to see this case rationally. That is why in any criminal investigation, there should never be any personal relationship between the investigator and the case they’re working on. It will be bias.

Like Mirna’s father, I’d like the justice to be served too. Definitely. But as a citizen of Indonesia, I would be wary if this is how the “justice” should be served. I would like the law to be upheld, so that everyone would be protected by it. It scares me that the public opinion could pressure the police officers to take whoever they have in hand as the suspect just to calm down the mob, and give fake closure to the family of the victim. It sounds like desperation for me.

I am not saying that J is not the murderer. But if it is her, I would like the investigation to be lawful, and not based on bogus experts opinion, and circumstantial evidences… not a strong ones either. I wish everybody the best… the justice’s served and the law upheld.

good luck.