DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/dilrev.9.1.2024.70-86

THE RELEVANCE OF ‘CHARACTER WITNESS’ TESTIMONY IN CRIMINAL CASES IN INDONESIA

*Devita Kartika Putri orcid  -  Faculty of Law, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia
Open Access Copyright (c) 2024 Diponegoro Law Review under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Character witnesses evidentiary relevance remains underexplored in Indonesian academic discourse. This article addresses this gap by examining the circumstances in which character witness testimony holds significance. Using qualitative study referencing eleven court decisions in criminal cases, the research identifies three key contexts where character witness testimony proves relevant. First, it serves to elucidate elements crucial to the assessment of a crime. Second, it aids in determining whether a defendant should be exempted from criminal liability. Third, it may influence sentencing considerations by either mitigating or aggravating the severity of penalties imposed. Moreover, the article examines the limitations inherent in character witness testimony. It highlights that such testimony may lack relevance to provide contextual assistance to the judges Additionally, while character witness testimony can potentially enhance understanding of a defendant's disposition, it cannot serve as sole grounds for conviction. Propensity evidence derived from character witness statements may be considered in sentencing phases to influence severity but cannot independently establish guilt. This article contributes to a nuanced understanding of the role of character witnesses within the Indonesian legal framework, offering insights into their potential impact on judicial decision-making and the boundaries of their evidentiary value in criminal proceedings.

Fulltext View|Download
Keywords: Character Witness; Relevance; Evidence; Indonesia

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Articles
Language : EN
Recent articles
ONE-PERSON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY: CONSIDERING COMPANY’S ORGAN GOVERNANCE OF THE INDONESIAN LEGAL ENTITIES FOR MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES TRANSFER OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT AS A COMPANY ASSET IN BANKRUPTCY IN INDONESIA SECURING PERSONAL DATA IN E-KYC: VITAL FOR DIGITAL ECONOMY GROWTH More recent articles
Most cited articles
MANAGEMENT, DISTRIBUTION, AND REDEMPTION OF VILLAGE FUND BRIDGING THE GAPS : A PARADIGMATIC INSIGHT INTO PHILOSOPHY OF LAW JUSTICE A YEARNING IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONTRACT IN THE SOCIETY REGULATIONS FOR E-COMMERCE AGREEMENT ACCORDING TO ICT ACT AND TITLE III OF INDONESIAN CIVIL CODE IMPLEMENTATION OF LEGAL PROTECTION BY THE GOVERNMENT IN ORDER TO EMPOWERMENT OF MICRO SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE TO REALIZE THE JUSTICE ECONOMY (Research Study: The Office of Cooperative and Micro Small and Medium Enterprise Province of Central Java) More cited articles
  1. Asmadi, Erwin. “Peran Psikiater Dalam Pembuktian Kekerasan Psikis Pada Korban Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Dalam Rumah Tangga.” De Lega Lata: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 3, no. 1 (2018): 39–51. https://doi.org/10.30596/dll.v3i1.3136
  2. Chaimansyah, Eky. “Hak Tersangka/Terdakwa Untuk Mengajukan Saksi a de Charge (Saksi Meringankan) Dalam Proses Perkara Pidana.” Lex Crimen 5, no. 2 (2016): 37–45, https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/index.php/lexcrimen/article/view/11114
  3. Cicchini, Michael D. “A Clean Record as Character Evidence.” Mississippi Law Journal 90, no. 2 (2021): 315–46. https://www.mississippilawjournal.org/journal-content/a-clean-record-as-character-evidence/
  4. CNN Indonesia. “Febri Diansyah Buka Alasan Beri Bukti Foto Brigadir J Di Klub Malam.” December 30, 2022. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20221229220013-12-893882/febri-diansyah-buka-alasan-beri-bukti-foto-brigadir-j-di-klub-malam
  5. CNN Indonesia. “Isak Tangis Ibu Brigadir J Pecah Saat Bersaksi Di Persidangan.” October 25, 2022. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20221025161631-12-865203/isak-tangis-ibu-brigadir-j-pecah-saat-bersaksi-di-persidangan
  6. Jendrek, M.P., and Kaplan, M.F. “Social Science Evidence and the Discrepancy in the Federal Rules of Evidence on Character Testimony.” Law & Psychology Review 11 (1987): 1139–53. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1987-34267-001
  7. Keane, Adrian, and Paul McKeown. The Modern Law of Evidence. 14th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022
  8. Kompas. “Putri Candrawathi Ceritakan Peristiwa Yang Tunjukkan Arogansi Yosua.” January 11, 2023. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2023/01/11/16143041/putri-candrawathi-ceritakan-peristiwa-yang-tunjukkan-arogansi-yosua
  9. Kotzen, Matthew. “Conditional Relevance and Conditional Admissibility.” Law and Philosophy, 2022, 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-022-09462-w
  10. Levanon, Liat. “‘Bad Character’, Tragic Errors and Deep Ignorance.” Legal Studies 39 (2019): 676–93. https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2018.56
  11. Mersky, Roy M., and Donald J. Dunn. Legal Research Illustrated. 8th ed. New York: Foundation Press, 2002
  12. Mumbunan, Angelin Rebecca. “Penerapan Sanksi Pidana Kepada Seorang Suami Yang Tidak Mampu Membiayai Istri Dan Anaknya Menurut Undang-Undang No. 23 Tahun 2004 Tentang Penghapusan Kekerasan Dalam Rumah Tangga.” Lex Crimen VIII, no. 2 (2018): 128–37. https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/v3/index.php/lexcrimen/article/view/22717
  13. Natali Jr. Louis M., "Are You Going to Arraign His Whole Life?": How Sexual Propensity Evidence Violates the Due Process Clause," Loyola University Chicago Law Journal 28, no. 1 (1996), https://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol28/iss1/2/
  14. Pangestu, Karunia, Heru Suyanto, and Rosalia Dika Agustanti. “Application of Circumstantial Evidence in Criminal Laws in Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum Novelty 12, no. 1 (2021): 54–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.26555/novelty.v12i01.a16996
  15. Setiawan, Dhevid, Muhadar, and Wiwie Heryani. “Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Psikis Dalam Kasus Kekerasan Dalam Rumah Tangga.” Pagaruyuang Law Journal 2, no. 1 (2018): 1–23. https://doi.org/10.31869/plj.v2i1.886
  16. Sevier, Justin. “Legitimizing Character Evidence.” Emory Law Journal 68, no. 3 (2019): 441–508. https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj/vol68/iss3/1/
  17. Siregar, Barunggam. “Nilai Kebenaran Dalam Keterangan Saksi ‘Meringankan’ Menjadi Saksi Memberatkan (Analisa Perkara Pidana Nomor: 696:Pid.B/2015/PN.Plg).” Lex Lata: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum 1, no. 3 (2019): 231–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.28946/lexl.v1i3.474
  18. Sitorus, Hotman. “Penelantaran Orang Lain Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2004.” Yure Humano 4, no. 1 (2020): 1–17. https://mputantular.ac.id/ojshukum/index.php/yurehumano/article/view/76
  19. Sugama, N.M. Raditya Pawani Peraba, and Suatra Putrawan. “Analisis Yuridis Mengenai Kemampuan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Dalam Pasal 44 KUHP.” Kertha Wicara 7, no. 4 (2018): 1–13. https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/kerthawicara/article/view/41970
  20. Theophilopoilos, Constantine, and Adrian Bellengère. “Relevance, Admissibility and Probative Value in a Rational System of Evidence: A South African Perspective.” PER/PELJ 25 (2022): 1–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2022/v25ia11966
  21. Tomei, Jenna, and Robert J. Cramer. “Perceived Credibility of Character Witness: Implications for Trial Consultation.” Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice 14, no. 3 (2014): 263–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2014.923710
  22. Webley, Lisa. “Qualitiative Approaches to Empirical Legal Research.” In The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199542475.013.0039
  23. Wurarah, Sherly. “Tata Cara Mengajukan Saksi Yang Mengungtungkan Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 Tentang Hukum Acara Pidana.” Lex et Societatis 5, no. 6 (2017): 73–80. https://doi.org/10.35796/les.v5i6.17910

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2024-11-20 06:56:20

No citation recorded.