Criminal prosecution of Garuda pilot

[Greg W.]

Originally Posted by Mick M

Any evidence can be tendered

There may be an attempt to tender material, but it is another thing whether it will be allowed into evidence. Put simply, the tendering of a document may (1) be objected to, and (2) the magistrate/judge may not allow it into evidence (after hearing legal argument on its admissibility).

Originally Posted by Mick M

... in court and there is very little information these days that cannot be subpoenaed in legal proceedings, particularly when there is a strong probitive value attached to that information.

Just because evidence is probative, does not of itself make it admissible. The court may refuse to admit evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger that the evidence might: (a) be unfairly prejudicial to a party; or b) be misleading or confusing; or (c) cause or result in undue waste of time. (s135 Evidence Act) In criminal proceedings, the court must refuse to admit evidence adduced by the prosecutor if its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the defendant. (s137 Evidence Act). That being said, I have never dealt with the rules of evidence anywhere outside of Australia, nor the Indonesian criminal burden of proof.

One MAJOR point I am completely bemused by is why the pilot didn't exercise his right to silence. My mind boggles at his decision to talk to the police, especially considering they are seeking life upon conviction. People will generally dig themselves a hole when trying to assist / cooperate with the authorities by participating in an interview; Rarely is it helpful for a defendant.