KEDUDUKAN CIRCUMTANSIAL EVIDENCE (BUKTI TIDAK LANGSUNG) DALAM PROSES PEMBUKTIAN TINDAK PIDANA (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 777/PID.B/2016/PN.JKT.PST)

Karina, Riva (2022) KEDUDUKAN CIRCUMTANSIAL EVIDENCE (BUKTI TIDAK LANGSUNG) DALAM PROSES PEMBUKTIAN TINDAK PIDANA (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 777/PID.B/2016/PN.JKT.PST). S1 thesis, Universitas Jambi.

	Text SKRIPSI FULL TEXT NEW.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Download (768kB)
	Text COVER SKRIPSI RIVA KARINA.pdf Download (37kB)
	Text PERSETUJUAN DAN PENGESAHAN.pdf Download (212kB)
	Text ABSTRAK RIVA.pdf Download (13kB)
	Text BAB 1 RIVA.pdf Download (300kB)
	Text BAB IV RIVA.pdf Download (138kB)
	Text DAFTAR PUSTAKA.pdf Download (144kB)

Abstract

This article aims to identify and analyze the position of indirect evidence used by the Panel of Judges as a basis for consideration to prove Defendant Jessica Kumalawangso committed the crime of premeditated murder as referred to in Article 340 of the Criminal Code. Indirect evidence was born and developed at the level of criminal law doctrine. Indirect evidence is a means of evidence in which the facts that occur and the evidence can only be seen after certain conclusions are drawn. This research method is normative legal research with a statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case approach. This thesis raises 2 (two) problem formulations, namely first, what is the position of circumstantial evidence (indirect evidence) in Indonesian criminal procedural law? Second, is the use of circumstantial evidence (indirect evidence) in Decision Number 777/Pid.B/2016/PN.JKT.PST relevant to be applied in uncovering material truths? The finding in this thesis is that the Criminal Procedure Code views that indirect evidence is not legal evidence as regulated in Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Then, because it is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code, indirect evidence is irrelevant to be used as an instrument to reveal the material truth because it has the potential to violate the objectives and principles of criminal procedural law. The Panel of Judges examining the a quo case deserves appreciation because it is trying to find a new law regarding evidence, but it needs attention to clarify the role and function of indirect evidence in order to create certainty in the future Criminal Procedure Code (ius constituendum).

Type:	Thesis (S1)
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Indirect Evidence, Legal Certainty, Evidence
Subjects:	L Education > L Education (General)
Divisions:	Fakultas Hukum > Ilmu Hukum
Depositing User:	Karina
Date Deposited:	21 Jun 2022 04:03
Last Modified:	21 Jun 2022 04:03
URI:	https://repository.unja.ac.id/id/eprint/35369

Actions (login required)

View Item