Feeling Strange Hearing Testimony from Bank Employee Related to Land Mafia Case that Affected Her Family, Nirina Zubir: Asked Don't Know

Kapanlagi.com - Nirina Zubir and her brother, Fadhlan Karim, were present again in the trial of the land mafia case that harmed their family. The losses suffered by Nirina's family amounted to IDR 17 billion.

After the trial, Fadhlan and Nirina felt there was something suspicious in the testimony of one of the witnesses presented by the prosecutor, Heru. Heru himself is one of the employees of BCA KCP Pondok Indah bank who served the defendant, Riri Khasmita, as a customer.

"That's strange. Someone who has supposedly worked at the bank for years, but doesn't know how their work mechanism is. That's a big bank," said Fadhlan when met after the trial at the West Jakarta District Court on Tuesday (28/6).

"The judge only asked about the job description, then the flow, and how the cycle was before (the loan credit file of Riri Khasmita) entered your department, which departments were involved. How can you not know? The answer is 'I don't know'," he continued.

1. Nirina Zubir Confused

Nirina Zubir (Credit Foto:KapanLagi.com/Irfan Kafril)

Nirina Zubir also expressed confusion about Heru's statement that he did not know the work flow, even though he had been working for 10 years.

"Asked who the document was for, where it came from, asked 'don't know'. If we work under the umbrella for more than 10 years, it's reasonable that we should know, at least know how the letter-making flow works," said Nirina Zubir.

2. Heru Confirms the Defendant

Not only that, in the previous trial Heru confirmed that the defendant Riri Khasmita and her husband, Edrianto, had come to BCA KCP Pondok Indah bank to apply for a credit loan worth IDR 1.3 billion. The loan was disbursed, and Riri Khasmita and Edrianto pledged their land certificates.

"I have been working as an academic companion for 4 years. I have been working at BCA since 1992," said Heru in his testimony.

3.

However, Heru admitted that he did not know when the judge asked whose job it was to check the completeness of the documents before he signed the loan agreement. Asked repeatedly about the same thing, Heru gave the same answer.

Heru appeared to be evasive, so the judge deemed him uncooperative. Finally, the judge decided to postpone the examination of Heru and continue the examination of the other three witnesses.

(kpl/irf/dyn)