Forensic Digital Expert Witness Session Of Alleged False Pledge Case, Explain About WA Group Chat

JAKARTA - The follow-up trial of the alleged false oath case with the defendant Ike Farida was again held at the South Jakarta District Court (PN), Wednesday, October 30 and the Public Prosecutor (JPU) presented three witnesses.

They are Angga Yuda Prawira from the DKI Jakarta BPN Regional Office, Faturohman from the East Jakarta Makassar KUA, as well as digital forensic expert witnesses, Saji Purwanto.

In front of the Panel of Judges, Saji admitted that he was the party who examined the cellphone evidence (HP) confiscated from witness Nurindah MM Simbolon as the former defendant's attorney.

Saji explained that the HP examination was aimed at knowing the conversation between Nurindah and Ike Farida in the February-December 2020 period regarding the application for a Review memory (PK) and the novum oath trial.

"I checked the Whatsapp Group (WAG) conversation between Nurindah and the group members who discussed the review memory application and the novum oath trial," Saji said when answering the prosecutor's question.

Saji revealed, in the WAG conversation, it was illustrated that Nurindah routinely provided reports, asking for opinions and approval regarding the steps taken in connection with the PK submission and the novum oath trial.

"Nurindah coordinates and asks for approval from someone called Sensei (in Japanese means teacher). Sensei is a defendant," he said.

Ike Farida's attorney, Agustrias Andika, said there was a difference between the conversation being examined by Saji and the defendant's side.

"Why is there a difference in the content of the conversation between what you are experts conveying and the data we have, are you an expert in changing the contents of the conversation?" asked Agustrias.

"What Ike Farida's attorney holds is only in the form of a resummation, while what the expert conveys is a quote from the conversation that fits the original," Saji replied.

After that, the Panel of Judges asked the experts to show directly the full content of the conversation between Nurindah and the defendant.

Meanwhile, witness Angga Yuda Prawira said that the DKI Jakarta BPN Regional Office's Letter dated November 27, 2015 was a reply to a letter from the Isdawati Lawyer's Office dated November 11, 2015.

"This letter was used as evidence of Ike Farida's default lawsuit against the 2015 developer and was used as new evidence or novum by Ike Farida when she submitted a request for judicial review in 2020," said Angga.

Meanwhile, witness Faturohman said that Ike Farida's marriage record in 1995 did not include an asset-separate marriage agreement with her husband, a foreign national.

However, it was only in 2017 that the defendant registered the marriage agreement deed at the Makasar District KUA, East Jakarta.

Interviewed during the trial break, Agustrias said the witnesses presented at the previous trial had provided false information.

"The statement from the BPN explained that regarding the BPN letter sent in 2015 which later became the object of this case, it was stated that the letter was genuine and correct. Next, the letter also proves that related to the examination of the apartment built by PT EPH until 2022 there is no retail permit. This means that there is no decree from the governor," said Agustrias.

"So the statements from witnesses from the reporting party and the reported party or victim yesterday were false statements at the trial stating that since 2020 they already have a Governor's Decree. In fact, it is only 2022," he added.