A new chapter in the David abuse case, AGH, Mario Dandy’s girlfriend, was examined by the police today

Suara.com – The Sub-Directorate for Renakta of the Ditreskrimum Polda Metro Jaya will examine AGH (15), girlfriend of Mario Dandy Satriyo (20) in relation to the persecution case against David (17) on Wednesday (8/3/2023) today.

Kabid Humas Polda Metro Jaya Kombes Pol Trunoyudo Wisnu Andiko said the examination of Mario Dandy’s girlfriend was scheduled to take place around 10.00 WIB.

“Yes, the plan is at 10.00 WIB,” Trunoyudo told reporters, Wednesday (8/3/2023).

During the examination process later, said Trunoyudo, AGH as a child in conflict with the law will receive assistance from the Correctional Center (Bapas) and the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection (Kemen PPPA).

Also Read: Luhut Rejects Strongly the Discourse of Moving the Pertamina Depot in Plumpang, Calls Out Local Residents Who Must Move

“Because the AG child is in conflict with the law, in addition to the lawyer concerned, he will be assisted by PK-Bapas, a companion from the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection, as an institution that provides protection for children who are in conflict with the law,” he said.

Previously, the Direskrimum Polda Metro Jaya Kombes Pol Hengki Haryadi disclosed evidence regarding the involvement of AG, the girlfriend of the suspect Mario, in the case of assaulting David. This evidence includes WhatsApp or WA messages to CCTV footage confiscated from around the scene of the incident.

Hengki said that based on the evidence, investigators decided to upgrade AG’s status to that of a child in conflict with the law or the perpetrator. The use of this term applies to minors who cannot be named as suspects like adults.

“After we adjusted it to the CCTV, we adjusted it with other evidence, we adjusted it to the WA chat, all of its roles were depicted there. Therefore, what we said earlier there was an increase in the status of children in conflict with the law to children in conflict with the law or perpetrators,” said Hengki at Polda Metro Jaya, Jakarta, Thursday (2/3/2023).

Based on this series of evidence, continued Hengki, investigators also discovered that there was planning. So that the investigator then applied Article 355 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code regarding the planned persecution.

Read also: Inul Daratista cries seeing the condition of David, a victim of abuse, Mario Dandy: This boy is very excited

“We see here that from digital evidence that there was planning from the start. When we started calling SL (the suspect Shane), then met SL then when the three of us were in the car (Mario, Shane and AG) there was a mens rea intention there,” Henki explained.

Fooling South Jakarta Police Investigators

On that occasion, Hengki also revealed that the suspects Mario, Shane Lukas Rotua Pangondian Lumbantoruan (19), and AG had lied while being questioned by South Jakarta Police investigators. To investigators, Mario Cs initially admitted that this incident was a fight, not persecution.

“We need to explain here that it turned out that at the beginning these suspects or the people at the TKP did not provide true information,” said Hengki.

However, said Hengki, Mario and friends did not move or could not avoid it when investigators presented evidence related to their involvement in the case of the persecution of David. This evidence includes CCTV footage, WhatsApp or WA chats, to videos on one of the perpetrators’ mobile phones.

“All the roles are depicted there,” said Hengki.

As is well known, the case of the persecution of David has been taken over by the Sub-Directorate for Renakta of the Ditreskrimum Polda Metro Jaya. From the results of the case title, investigators have also changed the construction of the article that was previously applied by South Jakarta Metro Police investigators.

Hengki explained that the suspect Mario was charged with Article 355 of the Criminal Code, Paragraph 1 Subsidiary 354 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code, more Subsidiary 353 Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code, especially Subsidiary 351 Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code and or 76 C Juncto 80 Law Number 35 of 2012 concerning Child Protection with maximum threats. 12 years in prison.

Meanwhile, the suspect Shane was charged with Article 355 Paragraph 1 Juncto 56 of the Criminal Code, Subsidiary 354 Paragraph 1 Juncto 56 of the Criminal Code, more Subsidiary 353 Paragraph 2 Juncto 56 of the Criminal Code, more Subsidiary 351 Paragraph 2 Juncto 56 of the Criminal Code and or 76 C Juncto 80 Law Number 35 of 2012 concerning Child Protection with a maximum threat of 12 years in prison.

While children in conflict with the AG law are charged with Article 76 C Juncto Article 80 Law Number 35 Years of Child Protection and or 355 Paragraph 1 Juncto 56 of the Criminal Code, more Subsidiary 353 Paragraph 2 Juncto 56 of the Criminal Code, more or less Subsidiary 351 Paragraph 2 Juncto 56 of the Criminal Code. For his actions, AG is threatened with a maximum sentence of 4 years in prison after reducing half of the maximum threat and reducing it by one third as stipulated in Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning Juvenile Justice.