The more I read about the Manohara (photo courtesy of The Jakarta Globe) case the more interesting it becomes in that slowing down as one goes past a car crash kind of a way. The story has all the ingredients for a TV movie, perhaps even a series or soap opera. It seems that these things are all possible with Manohara receiving numerous offers from local production houses in Indonesia. There has even been a suggestion that she will play herself in any movie of her story.
If the allegations of rape, torture, and other abuse is true, I really cannot fathom why you would want to play yourself and relive the horror. But, then again it is not me so I don't really know what motivates either Manohara or her mother, who seems to enjoy being in the spotlight. Although, reports suggest that Manohara is keen to continue her education in a business related field. Good luck to her on that front.
I strongly believe that an education is important. Let's face it, if your entertainment career does not pan out then at least you have other skills on which to fall back on to make ends meet.
No matter what happens, it would appear that Manohara is going to convert her new found fame as a result of her alleged trauma into an entertainment career, according to her mother they are still sifting through the offers and will ultimately choose one of them. Good luck to them both on that front as well.
Manohara's father is an American and her step-father is a Frenchman. Not too drama filled on that front. However, there is drama outside of Manohara's alleged abuse. The drama revolves around her mother, Daisy Fajarina, who it is alleged is subject to an Interpol warrant for her arrest relating to the abuse of a maid while she was living in France. It is being suggested that the reason Manohara and her mother fled France was not only the divorce of Daisy and her French husband, but the pending arrest.
If this is true, and there is a red notice with Interpol for her arrest then it does not make any sense for Daisy to be leaving the country. Also of interest is that the Malaysian authorities apparently know about this red notice. So, I would have figured they would have arrested her had she turned up on their shores.
Daisy would seem to be pretty safe in Indonesia as there is no extradition treaty between Indonesia and France. Nevertheless, the French want her for trial and I have no doubt would have broached the subject with their Indonesian counterparts both in Jakarta and Paris.
Somewhat ironic that Daisy is so vocal about her daughter being allegedly abused but not having too many problems about abusing others (allegedly).
The plot thickens.
16 comments:
Hi roab your wrote: On the other hand, I would have no problem with her husband demanding that Manohara substantiate the claims. Unless, of course, we have reached a point where in domestic violence cases the burden of proof has shifted to the accused to prove they did not abuse rather than with the alleged victim to prove their claim.
From Brett's blog
Could you pls unpack this - surely the state must prove DV and he will try to argue there was no DV. The victim will only be called as a witness?
Lawcrim...
In a criminal case the State would need to prove the case against the defendant and they would at least ask the victim to appear as a witness.
In that essence she would still need to give or provide evidence to prove her claims as being argued by the prosecution.
Hence the idea that the burden of proof being shifted from the accuser (being represented by the State) to the accused.
In a civil trial Manohara would also have to prove the claim, and by my reckoning, and even though the burden of prove is lower, she would still have to pony-up evidence in support of the claim. This would need to be at least to the level of probability that the abuse occurred.
Thus the idea that a full medical would be in order, photographic evidence of any physical scarring or wounds, a police report of the official complaint.
As it stands, the evidence of the serious crimes alleged are the statements that the Prince had a voracious sexual appetite and wanted sex more regularly than his wife (presumption being she said no and therefore we have a case of rape in marriage). Second, an alleged razor attack, which I am guessing would leave scars. And, an alleged kidnapping and confinement against one's will.
This is countered with the obvious; I didn't do it and the allegations are not true. A statement demanding that Manohara substantiate the claims. And, a statement from Manohara published in local Indonesian media that her flight from the prince was not an escape.
This was the context of my statement on Brett's blog, Spruiked (an excellent blog).
The unfortunate nature of blogging is that sometimes I get lazy and my comments are all over the place and sometimes I put them into the context of comments made elsewhere which usually results in lack of clarity or confusion for those who do not follow my every move (which I might add is no one).
This is why conversations are so much easier face-to-face :D
Hopefully, this unpacks it a little.
Hey thanks. You have overdone it. Yes I think Brett's blog is provative and thought provoking. He certainly is not afraid to give his point of view. I note that he doesn not get many comments - perhaps he is too provocative??
the role of the mother does seem a bit obvious - Im not sure of the fathers role in this matter. The fact that she is so young,and the topic a sensitive one, might mean the court proceedings may not be "normal"? procedural fairness? closed court??
thanks
Lawcrim...
On the fathers' roles; my understanding is that Manohara's biological father, and her mother's first husband, is an American. Apparently, that marriage lasted two years or so and there has been no contact (or very little) with him since then.
The step-father is a Frenchman. Apparently, he has nothing much more to do with Manohara or his former wife, Daisy.
The above two points are hearsay in the legal sense.
My understanding is that Daisy is on the run from French authorities so I do not know if this has anything to do with the lack of contact between Manohara and her step-father.
With respect to normal proceedings. I guess this depends on what one considers normal. Generally, sexual assault allegations againsta a child would be held in a closed court and hte identity of the child would be protected. The Child Protection Law in Indonesia holds to this standard (cannot remember the art. number).
However, the fact that Manohara and her mother ave courted the media in this affair means that a closed court proceeding would seem unlikely albeit not a foregone conclusion. Technically, the judges could still sit in closed sessions. Furthermore, generally under Indonesia law once a young woman (girl) marries she ceases to be a child in the eyes of the law (same for young men / boys). However, I would argue that this would be in a case where a legitimate underage marriage could be established. That is to say, the marriage met / satisfied the requirements set out by the prevailing laws and regulations.
For example, where the parents approve of their 16-year-old daughter marrying her 17-year-old partner. In the technical legal sense they are both children based on their age yet because the marriage is valid under the law; the parents have consented and the marriage was conducted pursuant to the prevailing provisions in the law, then they cease to be children and become adults.
I am not convinced that this matter is going to go to either criminal or civil trial. There might be an out of court settlement (although I am not sure that this is a foregone conclusion either).
It seems the mother is more interested in angling for an entertainment contract. I have heard (hearsay again) that there was a suggestion that if a production house came up with a billion Rupiah contract then Manohara would be interested in a movie deal.
Sad really considering the serious nature of the allegations being the source of the current interest in her story.
Brett is a provocative young fella. That is why I visit his blog regularly. Not everyone that visits a blog leaves a comment. I am not privy to his stats. So, maybe a lot more people visit than comment.
I gotta say that I like reading the analysis of those who like to call things as they see them.
Yes, again thanks. Your comments make a blog. I raise a few things..
In the case where the parents assent to a marriage of underage children I wonder what responsiblity they have towards the marriage. Or do the couple become "automatic adults" - with full capacity?
I would say there is no chance this one will get into the courts - anywhere. Again it shows, I think, my point about the inadequateness of the law and the parties knowledge of its inadequateness - ok there is no need/requirement for the law to get involved in civi matters; and I do assume that unless she presses charges there will be no criminal case either - again the state has no role/duty to start arrest and proceedings?
Furthermore I could not believe the haste (undelayed injustice) of the Prita cases - two trials (well almost) in two weeks. Did you read her letter? A sad case really. I think we all have to keep in mind that doctors know not too much - dengue v mumps - and when it comes to what we might feel is mistreatment, its not a done deal. I believe in Oz as long as the doctor has followed standard practice he has fulfilled his/her standard of care.
If you care to respond it would be appreciated.
Do you think we should run Jakartass in for knowingly purchasing pirated gear and lying in the street??
Yes, again thanks. Your comments make a blog. I raise a few things..
In the case where the parents assent to a marriage of underage children I wonder what responsiblity they have towards the marriage. Or do the couple become "automatic adults" - with full capacity?
I would say there is no chance this one will get into the courts - anywhere. Again it shows, I think, my point about the inadequateness of the law and the parties knowledge of its inadequateness - ok there is no need/requirement for the law to get involved in civi matters; and I do assume that unless she presses charges there will be no criminal case either - again the state has no role/duty to start arrest and proceedings?
Furthermore I could not believe the haste (undelayed injustice) of the Prita cases - two trials (well almost) in two weeks. Did you read her letter? A sad case really. I think we all have to keep in mind that doctors know not too much - dengue v mumps - and when it comes to what we might feel is mistreatment, its not a done deal. I believe in Oz as long as the doctor has followed standard practice he has fulfilled his/her standard of care.
If you care to respond it would be appreciated.
Do you think we should run Jakartass in for knowingly purchasing pirated gear and lying in the street??
Lawk...
On your first point / question. It depends on which side I was being asked to argue. I think it is possible to argue either way.
Generally, I think the cards might fall more favourably on the side of the child, once married, attains full legal capacity.
It seems unlikely that Indonesian courts would be favourable to arguments that once a child became legally an adult they could return to being a child. Maybe this is once you have been legitimately married and consumated that marriage then it is a done deal, you're an adult.
In terms of parental responsibility; provided there was no illegality in the procedures under which the marriage is conducted, then I cannot see that there is any responsibility for the failure of the marriage or if there is violence in the marriage.
Not that these things could not be argued.
On the Prita case. Simple defamation is going to be easy to prove. However, you cannot defame someone or something if the essence of what you have published is, in fact, true.
The difficulty for Prita might be getting the original medical records that she will need to prove her claims.
Conceivably, the hospital could ensure the original records are lost or whatever. Prita would then need a whistle-blower that could enlighten the court as to specific practices at Omni hospital, and more specifically to Prita's case.
I am not a doctor, but the standard care arguments would be an interesting argument in the event of a misdiagnosis.
I had the impression from the letter that the allegations are of multiple failures in the diagnosis and that some of the diagnoses were made merely to allow for "medications" and "treatments" to be administered.
I am guessing that no matter what the decision is in this case, it will go up the chain on appeal.
You did not comment on the speed the case went ahead. Dont you think this is unfair in some way - I was trying to reverse the justice delayed is justice denied argument.
What is also interesting is that this was fully paid insurance claim case (from her letter) - the hospital may have "over medicated" on this basis (my belief/experience) -= moral hazard.
IM wondering what Brett thinks of Jakartass's periodic piracy purchases!!
Lawk...
No, not surprised on the speed at which the case went ahead. Without speculating on why this case might have been prioritized in preference to other cases.
The simple reality is once the "dossier" (case brief) is ready, then it can be listed and heard.
The other reality for me is that this is a pretty simple case. None of the major facts seem to be contested with respect to publication.
Defamation is a matter of fact and the court will determine whether the published material defames or is in the alternative, the truth. The truth cannot defame.
I would agree. The letter seems to indicate that she was using pretty comprehensive insurance cover to get the treatment. However, the moral hazard issue is probably a separate issue. Unless, the over-medication is an issue of fact in terms of the truth of the complaint.
No idea what Brett thinks of J's purchasing habits. You could ask him if you wanted to. I have noticed Brett has commented on a number of J's posts. So, I am guessing if he has issues then it is up to him how he expresses them.
On the piracy front. I wonder whether the demand exists because there is supply or the supply exists because there is demand. As a matter of fact it reminds me of an argument I once participated in about prostitution. ;)
The points on these issues have already been made previously.
Because nobody can be arrested unless some form of complaint is made. Generally - if the wife is not willing to press charges there is no 'probable cause' to justify an arrest.
Do you agree
Lawk...
I think an arrest could be made. If the evidence is there. For example, a husband beats his wife to the extent she needs to be hospitalized or someone witnesses the beating (let's say through an open window and that witness is a police officer called to the scene because a concerned neighbour heard screaming).
The problem as I see it would be the refusal to testify at trial.
Hypothetically, let's use the Chris Brown / Rhianna alleged beating. If news reports are to be believed then it seems like a certainty for a conviction.
Rhianna has supposedly made a statement to police alleging that it was Brown who beat her. There are hospital reports and photos of the injuries sustained in the beating (these photos have even made it to the Internet).
Despite the statement, Rhianna would still have to be willing to testify in order to allow cross-examination of the statement. If she refuses to testify to the facts of the statement then the prosecution might have some difficulty in moving forward.
So, in a nutshell, I think there is less to an arrest than just a complaint. People are arrested all the time without a complaint and probable cause. The validity of arrests are always tested as parted of the process, particularly if there are issues regarding probable cause.
Probable cause for an arrest and pressing charges are two different matters.
For example, there could be probable cause for the arrest but the victim refuses to press charges or to testify.
Do I agree? What do you think? Why is it that I feel like I am being examined on my legal knowledge? You thinking about offering me some employment teaching law? :D
Lawk...
If you have specific cases in mind then fire away.
This is a new phenomena that beat the president election issues in Indonesia, my country.
Lastest news that I got that the lawyer of Manohara, OC Kaligis apply to resign as her lawyer since she's too busy to publish her story on gossip channels instead of fix her legal issues
There could be a job in it by the way!
im not testing you - and would not ask you if I felt I could find the answer myself. I value your opinions and I hope others do as well. Are you being read, sir?
Do you know the law in relation to the rights of a husband to demand sex? I guess this has been well delineated in case law: but again I wonder how it goes in an islamic state such as Kelantan, and even in Indonesia.
Again I would assume there are many opinions about this, and I would say it was much more important than Mr kaligis's (pro bono?) recent non interest in the case - is it simply as Don has said?
Don...
It seems that the lawyers are resigning on both sides of this one. This is a potential money spinner for Manohara and her mother irrespective of whether this unsavoury incident ever gets to trial.
O.C. Kaligis resigning is neither here nor there in the big scheme of things.
Lawk...
My stats would say that I am not being read by many outside of your good-self.
I will get back to the rest of your questions later.
Quite worthwhile material, thank you for the post.
Post a Comment