TINJAUAN YURIDIS KEDUDUKAN “SAKSI MAHKOTA (KROONGETUIGE)” SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA INDONESIA
| Main Author: | NURINDAH SARI, LILY |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis NonPeerReviewed Book |
| Bahasa: | eng |
| Terbitan: |
, 2009
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: |
http://eprints.umm.ac.id/8907/1/TINJAUAN_YURIDIS_KEDUDUKAN_%E2%80%9CSAKSI_MAHKOTA.pdf http://eprints.umm.ac.id/8907/ |
Daftar Isi:
- The Crown witness usage still exist until now. Crown witness is also the subject who did criminal. He/she claimed as suspect whose accusation same with the other suspect who was given witnesses. The sworn witness should say the truth about what he/she saw, heard, and did. If not, he/she would be accused for fake witnesses, and as suspect, he couldn’t use rejection rights since he/she was tied by his/her own vow. Crown witness got psychological pressure because of his/her position as witness and suspect in the same accusation. The research took statement of problems: (1) how the position of crown witness in the revealing process of case in Indonesia’s criminal court law? (2) Why did the judge allowed the usage of crown witness as the evidence in criminal court system? The research used normative-juridical approach, data collection technique come from library study. Data research was analyzed in content analisys way. There could be concluded that the crown witness position in case revealing process in Indonesia’s criminal court system wasn’t arranged in Criminal Court Law since according to the Criminal Court Law, the legal evidence were witness explanation, expert explanation, letter, clue, and suspect explanation. While about crown witness, it wasn’t explained in Criminal Court Law. The base of judge consideration still using Crown Witness as evidence in Criminal Court were still there was no fixed-jurisprudence about the prohibition of crown withness usage. So about the crown witness usage, there still no exact rule which allowed or disallowed it. Keywords : Crown Witness, evidences, Criminal Court Law.