Read Pleidoi, Defendant In UNS Menwa Education And Training Case Please Release Judge

PHOTO VIA BETWEEN

SOLO - The two defendants in the criminal case of persecution in the Student Regiment Basic Training Education (Diklatsar Menwa) UNS pleaded with the panel of judges to acquit him of all charges in the plea trial at the Surakarta District Court.

Defendant I Nanang Fahrizal Maulana (22) and Defendant II Faizal Pujut Juliono (22) through their legal advisors, Darius Marhendra Yudya Wardana, Ari Santoso, and Retno Evi Arini, in the pledoi stated that they firmly rejected and disagreed with the indictment of the public prosecutor ( prosecutor).

The legal advisor considered it inappropriate and inappropriate for the defendant to be charged, prosecuted, blamed, and sentenced to Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) of the 1st Criminal Code.

At the trial with a plea for the defendant in the case of persecution, the Menwa Education and Training activities led by Suprapti as chairman and members of Lucius Sunarno and Dwi Hananto were carried out face-to-face. However, for the two defendants, Nanang Fahrizal Maulana and Faizal Pujut Juliono, online.

The defendant's legal counsel requested that the noble panel of judges examine and try this case, giving the first decision stating that one defendant Nanang Fahrizal Maulana and two defendants Faizal Pujut Juliono were not legally and convincingly proven to have committed a criminal act as regulated and threatened with Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code jo . Article 55 paragraph (1) 1 of the Criminal Code.

The defendant's legal adviser, Ari Santoso, added that the prosecutor's indictment contained elements that were not fulfilled and the defendant was not blamed for the death of the victim Gilang Endi Saputra, a student who during the UNS Menwa Education and Training Center as a result of a collision, demanded that the two defendants be released, restored to their dignity, and released from detention.

Ari Santoso explained that it was revealed in the trial that the cause of death of Gilang Endi Saputra based on visum et repertum number VER/59/X/2021/Biddokes dated October 29, 2021 which was examined by doctor Istiqomah stated in the conclusion section that the cause of death was blunt trauma to the head caused by suffocation.

Doctor Istiqomah as an expert witness in the trial stated that the cause of Gilang Endi Saputra's death was a blow to the back of the left side of the head, which was written on the VeR number VER/59/X/2021/Biddokes in section D. the back of the head on the left.

"The expert witness stated that the source or direction of the impact was from the left side," said Ari.

According to him, the facts revealed in the trial based on the statements of the witnesses presented and the statements of the defendants being linked to one another revealed that the victim Gilang Endi Saputra had hit him from the back of his head and his whole body when he was in a trance or convulsions. The victim banged the back of his head on the floor with force and force repeatedly.

In fact, it was revealed in the trial based on witness testimony from the Diklatsar participants that defendant one did not carry a replica weapon with Gilang Endi. It was revealed in the trial that the two defendants beat the participants with protective helmets, including the victim, but did not feel any pain or interfere with their health.

Meanwhile, Judge Suprapti who presided over the trial of the criminal case against the Menwa Education and Training Center will continue this trial with the agenda of a replica or answer to the plea or defense of the defendant which will be held at the Surakarta District Court.

The Public Prosecutor's Office for the City of Surakarta previously demanded that the two defendants in the abuse case against Nanang Fahrizal Maulana and Faizal Pujut Juliono be sentenced to 7 years in prison.

Prosecutor Sri Ambar Prasongko said he believed the two defendants had committed the acts as alleged in Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code jo. Article 55 paragraph (1) 1 of the Criminal Code.

"There are no mitigating factors because the defendant does not admit his actions, is not cooperative, and is fickle," he said.