Public Prosecutor Rejects Novum From Saka Tatal In PK Efforts In The Vina Cirebon Case
JAKARTA - The Public Prosecutor's Team (JPU) rejected the evidence submitted by Saka Tatal in an effort to review the murder case of Vina and Eky, because it was considered inconsistent so that it could not be used as a novum."We consider the applicant to be inconsistent in stating the incident, so we consider it not a novum or new evidence," said Gema Wahyudi, a representative of the Public Prosecutor, after the PK continued trial at the Cirebon District Court (PN), West Java, Antara, Friday, July 26.Gema explained that there were several important points related to the prosecutor's conclusion, in response to the 10 novums submitted by the applicant in the PK trial.The prosecutor highlighted the discrepancy in the applicant's attorney's statement, which stated that the cause of Vina and Eky's death in 2016 was suspected to be a single traffic accident.In fact, he said, Saka Tatal had admitted to beating the victim Eky, but then the applicant changed his narrative by eliminating the incident of abuse in the case.“It should be remembered that the applicant stated that it was a murder incident, but Saka Tatal denied it, who was only beating him. Then it was changed again by the applicant to a single traffic accident, ” he said.Furthermore, Gema conveyed that some of the novums in the PK process came partly from social media whose content and information could not be tested comprehensively.In addition, the Public Prosecutor also found several pieces of evidence submitted by the applicant, which had actually been presented at the trial in 2016.On this basis, Gema said that the prosecutor finally decided to reject the novum submitted by the applicant.The public prosecutor is of the opinion that the efforts of the PK from Saka Tatal do not meet the requirements, because the applicant has not been able to present new evidence that can influence previous legal decisions.The “ Photos that are used as novums already exist and are attached to the case file (in 2016). Almost everything has been examined and has permanent legal force, ” he said.Meanwhile Krisna Murti, one of Saka Tatal's attorneys, said that the 10 new pieces of evidence that had been submitted to the Cirebon District Court were novums to strengthen that her client was not involved in the Vina and Eky cases.He considered it natural for the novum to be rejected, because the position of the prosecutor in the PK trial was as the respondent."Surely the prosecutor will refuse with the new evidence we put forward and that's natural," he said.Krisna emphasized that Saka Tatal was not involved in the case, because at that incident his client was not at the scene.He added that the Public Prosecutor had a wrong perception regarding the statement that Saka Tatal had beaten him.
His party claimed that the information contained in the PK memory was the decision of the 2016 trial and became a form of mistake by the previous judge."The statement is the result of the judge's previous decision. Based on our statement, Saka Tatal was not at the scene," he said.