EVIDENCE 15: PROSECUTORS MANIPULATING THE CONTENT OF FLASH DRIVE
The 37 Scientific Evidence of Digital Evidence Tampering on CCTV Footage at Olivier Café: The Jessica Kumala Wongso Case (2016), Carried Out by Muhammad Nuh Al-Azhar and Christopher Hariman Rianto, Who were Under the Leadership of the General Crime Director of the Jakarta Metropolitan Police, Krishna Murti, and the Chief of the Jakarta Metropolitan Police, Tito Karnavian.
EVIDENCE 15: FOLDERS CCTV 15 AND CCTV 16 SUDDENLY ADDED TO FLASH DRIVE IN PROSECUTOR'S POSSESSION
A digital forensic analysis of the flash drive held by the prosecutor revealed several important details. First, when factual witnesses Marlon Napitupulu and Agus Triyono testified in court on July 20, 2016, the flash drive contained only 11 CCTV folders, with folders CCTV 15 and CCTV 16 missing. However, when Jessica was presented as the defendant, the number of CCTV folders increased to 13, as previously mentioned. This indicates that there was a modification or change to the contents of the flash drive.
Furthermore, during the trial when Jessica Kumala Wongso was presented as the defendant on September 28, 2016, the flash drive played by the prosecutor again showed 13 CCTV folders, containing files from CCTV cameras 1 to 9, as well as CCTV 15, CCTV 16, CCTV 17, and CCTV 18. What is noteworthy is the modification dates of the folders, where most folders have a modification date of January 12, 2016, except for folder CCTV 15, which has a modification date of July 21, 2016, and folder CCTV 16, which has a modification date of July 26, 2016.
The change in modification dates for folders CCTV 15 and CCTV 16 is suspicious because it is inconsistent with the modification dates of the other folders. This indicates that there was manipulation or editing done to these two folders after the modification dates of most of the other folders. Such editing suggests that the authenticity and integrity of the digital evidence have been compromised.
The motive could be to undermine the defense's ability to respond effectively to the evidence. The sudden appearance of two new folders could catch the defense off guard, limiting their time to analyze and respond to the new evidence. This could create an imbalance in the courtroom, favoring the prosecution by putting the defense at a strategic disadvantage.
The inconsistency in modification dates is also a critical factor suggesting intentional manipulation. Most folders have a modification date of January 12, 2016, but folders CCTV 15 and CCTV 16 were modified in July 2016. This discrepancy indicates that these folders were added or altered much later, likely with a specific purpose in mind. This could be an attempt to fabricate or alter evidence to fit a desired narrative, casting doubt on the integrity of the digital evidence and the intentions behind its presentation.
Moreover, the timing of the addition of these folders raises questions about the integrity of the judicial process. The fact that the folders appeared just before Jessica's tria
EVIDENCE 15: FOLDERS CCTV 15 AND CCTV 16 SUDDENLY ADDED TO FLASH DRIVE IN PROSECUTOR'S POSSESSION
A digital forensic analysis of the flash drive held by the prosecutor revealed several important details. First, when factual witnesses Marlon Napitupulu and Agus Triyono testified in court on July 20, 2016, the flash drive contained only 11 CCTV folders, with folders CCTV 15 and CCTV 16 missing. However, when Jessica was presented as the defendant, the number of CCTV folders increased to 13, as previously mentioned. This indicates that there was a modification or change to the contents of the flash drive.
Furthermore, during the trial when Jessica Kumala Wongso was presented as the defendant on September 28, 2016, the flash drive played by the prosecutor again showed 13 CCTV folders, containing files from CCTV cameras 1 to 9, as well as CCTV 15, CCTV 16, CCTV 17, and CCTV 18. What is noteworthy is the modification dates of the folders, where most folders have a modification date of January 12, 2016, except for folder CCTV 15, which has a modification date of July 21, 2016, and folder CCTV 16, which has a modification date of July 26, 2016.
The change in modification dates for folders CCTV 15 and CCTV 16 is suspicious because it is inconsistent with the modification dates of the other folders. This indicates that there was manipulation or editing done to these two folders after the modification dates of most of the other folders. Such editing suggests that the authenticity and integrity of the digital evidence have been compromised.
The motive could be to undermine the defense's ability to respond effectively to the evidence. The sudden appearance of two new folders could catch the defense off guard, limiting their time to analyze and respond to the new evidence. This could create an imbalance in the courtroom, favoring the prosecution by putting the defense at a strategic disadvantage.
The inconsistency in modification dates is also a critical factor suggesting intentional manipulation. Most folders have a modification date of January 12, 2016, but folders CCTV 15 and CCTV 16 were modified in July 2016. This discrepancy indicates that these folders were added or altered much later, likely with a specific purpose in mind. This could be an attempt to fabricate or alter evidence to fit a desired narrative, casting doubt on the integrity of the digital evidence and the intentions behind its presentation.
Moreover, the timing of the addition of these folders raises questions about the integrity of the judicial process. The fact that the folders appeared just before Jessica's tria
Category
📚
LearningTranscript
00:00Australian resident Jessica Wongso has been charged with the murder of Minis Alihin.
00:07Police allege she poisoned her friend by adding cyanide to her coffee.
00:11Jessica is like a devil.
00:14Deep inside is something like evil.
00:21The trial of the century is true.
00:26A digital forensic analysis of the flash drive held by the prosecutor revealed several important
00:40details.
00:41First, when factual witnesses Marlon Napotupoulou and Agus Trajano testified in court on July
00:4720, 2016, the flash drive contained only 11 CCTV folders, with folders CCTV-15 and CCTV-16
00:56missing.
00:57However, when Jessica was presented as the defendant, the number of CCTV folders increased
01:03to 13, as previously mentioned.
01:06This indicates that there was a modification or change to the contents of the flash drive.
01:11Furthermore, during the trial when Jessica Kamala Wongso was presented as the defendant
01:16on September 28, 2016, the flash drive played by the prosecutor again showed 13 CCTV folders,
01:24containing files from CCTV cameras 1 to 9, as well as CCTV-15, CCTV-16, CCTV-17, and CCTV-18.
01:34What is noteworthy is the modification dates of the folders, where most folders have a
01:38modification date of January 12, 2016, except for folder CCTV-15, which has a modification
01:46date of July 21, 2016, and folder CCTV-16, which has a modification date of July 26,
01:542016.
01:56The change in modification dates for folders CCTV-15 and CCTV-16 is suspicious because
02:02it is inconsistent with the modification dates of the other folders.
02:07This indicates that there was manipulation or editing done to these two folders after
02:11the modification dates of most of the other folders.
02:14Such editing suggests that the authenticity and integrity of the digital evidence have
02:18been compromised.
02:20The motive could be to undermine the defense's ability to respond effectively to the evidence.
02:26The sudden appearance of two new folders could catch the defense off guard, limiting their
02:30time to analyze and respond to the new evidence.
02:34This could create an imbalance in the courtroom, favoring the prosecution by putting the defense
02:38at a strategic disadvantage.
02:41The inconsistency in modification dates is also a critical factor, suggesting intentional
02:46manipulation.
02:48Most folders have a modification date of January 12, 2016, but folders CCTV-15 and CCTV-16
02:56were modified in July 2016.
02:59This discrepancy indicates that these folders were added or altered much later, likely with
03:04a specific purpose in mind.
03:06This could be an attempt to fabricate or alter evidence to fit a desired narrative, casting
03:11doubt on the integrity of the digital evidence and the intentions behind its presentation.
03:16Moreover, the timing of the addition of these folders raises questions about the integrity
03:21of the judicial process.
03:24The fact that the folders appeared just before Jessica's trial could suggest an effort to
03:28sway the trial's outcome.
03:31Introducing new evidence at a critical juncture might be intended to influence the judge's
03:34perception, steering the verdict in favor of the prosecution.
03:39This tactic, if proven intentional, undermines the fairness and transparency of the legal
03:44proceedings.
03:46The actions of those responsible for modifying the flash drive reflect a serious breach of
03:50ethical standards.
03:53Forensic experts and legal professionals are expected to uphold the integrity of evidence.
03:58Manipulating digital evidence not only compromises the case at hand, but also erodes public trust
04:04in the justice system.
04:06Such actions suggest a willingness to bypass ethical guidelines to achieve a particular
04:10outcome, highlighting the need for stringent oversight and accountability in handling and
04:15presenting forensic evidence.
04:17Prosecutors who manipulate evidence, such as altering the contents of a flash drive,
04:21must face severe legal and professional consequences to uphold justice and maintain the integrity
04:27of the legal system.
04:29They should be charged with crimes like tampering with evidence and obstruction of justice,
04:33which could lead to imprisonment and substantial fines.
04:37Additionally, their licenses to practice law should be revoked or suspended due to professional
04:42misconduct, effectively ending their legal careers and deterring others from similar
04:46unethical behavior.
04:48Civil liability should also be imposed, with affected parties able to file lawsuits for
04:53financial compensation and damages caused by the manipulation.
04:57Beyond these legal penalties, the prosecutor's actions should trigger a review and potential
05:02reversal of any wrongful convictions resulting from the manipulated evidence.
05:08This is crucial for exonerating innocent defendants and restoring public trust in the justice
05:12system.
05:14Ethical misconduct by prosecutors severely damages the credibility of legal institutions,
05:19and imposing strict punishments is necessary to prevent such breaches.
05:23Furthermore, the professional and personal reputations of the involved prosecutors should
05:28be publicly scrutinized, reinforcing the importance of ethical conduct and maintaining
05:33the public's confidence in the legal community.