NURSAMRAN SUBANDI: TOKSIKOLOG HITUNG MUNDUR MANUAL SAJA SALAH WAKTU MASUKNYA SIANIDA!

Balige Academy

Video CCTV yang telah direkayasa diputar di persidangan dan diberikan kepada sejumla ahli: psikolog Antonia Ratih Anjayani dan Sarlito Wirawan Sarwono, kriminolog Ronny Nitibaskara, psikiater Natalia Widiasih Raharjanti, toksikolog Nursamran Subandi dan I Made Agus Gelgel, dan kepada ahli huku pidana Edward Omar Sharif Hiariej.  Keenam jaksa penipu Ardito Muwardi, Shandy Handika, Sugih Carvallo, Hari Wibowo, Wahyu Oktaviandi, dan Maylany Wuwung berkomplot dengan sesama penipu perekayasa video CCTV Muhammad Nuh Al-Azhar (Ketua Asosiasi Forensik Digital Indonesia AFDI 2015-2019) dan Christopher Hariman Rianto yang diorkestrasi oleh Krishna Murti dan Tito Karnavian.  Isi flashdisk di tangan jaksa sendiri berubah waktu demi waktu tetapi mereka seolah tidak peduli dengan keutuhan (integritas) data yang ada di dalamnya. Sesi tanya-jawab dengan kedua ahli forensik digital penipu tersebut dirancang agar rekayasa yang mereka rencanakan berhasil menggiring publik dan hakim untuk memutuskan perkara sesuai dengan rekayasa mereka. Dan mereka berhasil.  Ahli IT gadungan Roy Suryo juga dalam beberapa wawancara TV menipu publik bahwa video CCTV yang ditampilkan di persidangan asli dan tidak direkayasa.  Video CCTV rekayasa tersebutpun menjadi pertimbangan hakim Binsar Gultom, Partahi Tulus Hutapea, dan Kisworo dalam memutuskan perkara.  Diharapkan para istri pelaku rekayasa Tri Suswati (istri Tito Karnavian),  Nany Ariany Utama (istri Krishna Murti), INGRID CHAIYANLI (istri Christopher Hariman Rianto), Riri Ananingdyah Wibisono (istri Shandy Handika), dan lainnya untuk mendesak para suaminya untuk mengaku salah telah merekayasa video CCTV di kafe Olivier kasus Jessica Wongso. Karena sebagai sesama perempuan, seharusnya mereka memahami perasaan perempuan yang menjadi korban rekayasa para suami mereka.  Begitu juga keluarga Edi Darmawan Salihin: Made Sandy Salihin, Tiara Agnesia, Ni Ketut Sianti,  Arief Soemarko, dan lainnya agar mencari kebenaran kematian Mirna Salihin, berdasarkan bukti ilmiah bahwa Jessica Kumala Wongso adalah korban rekayasa.  Begitu pula dengan para istri hakim Binsar Gultom, Sri Misgianti, agar menyadarkan suaminya bahwa keputusannya didasarkan video CCTV yang sudah direkayasa Muhammad Nuh Al-Azhar dan Christopher Hariman Rianto.  KITA TIDAK INGIN KASUS INI DAN PEGI SETIAWAN TERJADI DI REPUBLIK INI!!!  37 BUKTI ILMIAH REKAYASA VIDEO CCTV OLEH MUHAMMAD NUH AL-AZHAR DAN CHRISTOPHER HARIMAN RIANTO: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ufO4JQdDZSBvSzRnbjVQFJVWIZSIYU9e/view?usp=sharing    SEMANGAT MEMBONGKAR REKAYASA VIDEO CCTV KASUS JESSICA KUMALA WONGSO RISMON HASIHOLAN SIANIPAR

Transcript

00:00Australian resident Jessica Wongso has been charged with the murder of Minis Alihin.

00:08Police allege she poisoned her friend by adding cyanide to her coffee.

00:13Hello, Bali Geek Academy is here in front of you.

00:19This time we will embarrass again the quality of the toxicology laboratory.

00:27I'm sorry.

00:29It's wrong to count backwards. There is no more apologizing or anything.

00:35There is no self-retrofaction, self-introfaction.

00:40Regarding the quality, it determines the life of others.

00:45Article 340 of the Criminal Code, the threat of death or life imprisonment.

00:51But how can it be wrong?

00:54According to Sambram Subandi, this doctor, S1 Unhas, S2 Unhas, S3 IPB.

01:03A doctor.

01:05A doctor.

01:07Imagine, in toxicology, cyanide and all kinds of things.

01:12Hasn't he ever been taught to learn mathematical modeling for cyanide reduction?

01:18Admittedly, the doctor's thesis is cyanide.

01:21There is a lot of training in that profile.

01:24But why is the modeling quadratic?

01:27The parabola should be open.

01:30This is very bad.

01:33Mabis Pohri, toxicology, Mabis Pohri.

01:37He already uses Excel for office applications.

01:43The mathematical model is flat, quadratic.

01:47And if the quadratic goes down, it goes up again.

01:49Didn't he learn mathematical modeling or what?

01:53In fact, the worst and the worst of all is the countdown.

01:59From January 16th, reduced by 90 hours.

02:08Let's take a look at the problem.

02:10On January 10th, at 10.30 p.m., he conducted an experiment.

02:17It was reduced.

02:19On January 10th, 2016, from his approach, it was 90 hours, 9 minutes, 36 seconds.

02:26When he went back, when the cyanide was estimated,

02:29from January 10th, it was obtained on January 6th, 16.39.

02:34So, he made a standard deviation of 50 centimeters,

02:3816.30 to 16.45,

02:40adjusting the animation hand with a manual laser, 16.29.30.

02:47After we calculated it manually, this is what he did.

02:52From January 10th, 2016, at 10.30 p.m., it was reduced by 90 hours, 9 minutes, 36 seconds.

02:59He calculated it manually.

03:02I don't have to use the program, 16.20, 24.

03:06The result is January 6th, 2016, 16.20, 24.

03:12At that time, he was still paying in cash for the close bill.

03:17Not only that, he also used quadratic.

03:21The ball was open.

03:23As soon as it went down, it went up again.

03:26The problem is the cyanide was not reduced or decomposed.

03:31Instead, it went up.

03:33This is my experiment.

03:35This went up for 500 hours.

03:38This went up for 300 hours.

03:41He only tested up to 120 hours.

03:44The data is poor, 5 centimeters.

03:47This is for 1,000 hours.

03:49I show the deviation value every 1,000 hours.

03:52This is every 50 hours.

03:54Can you imagine?

03:56Later in the video, I will show the simulation.

04:01Can you imagine?

04:03This is fatal.

04:04In a toxicology laboratory,

04:06a doctor,

04:08Nusamran Subandi,

04:10has used a simple mathematical model for cyanide.

04:15Have you ever studied in high school or high school?

04:18Quadratic, right?

04:19The ball was open.

04:20As soon as it went down, it went up again.

04:23This is bad.

04:25Not to mention the simulation with only 5 samples.

04:28There are no validation samples.

04:32Only 5.

04:33The sample used to simulate

04:35there are no samples left.

04:37One or two samples for validation.

04:40This is a broken model.

04:42As soon as it went down, it was bad.

04:45Only manual.

04:47This is wrong.

04:48This is a doctor.

04:49A doctor from IPB.

04:53Why didn't he do a convergence test

04:56or a validation test for his next model?

04:59The important thing is that it fits the animation time.

05:03The animation time of the laser.

05:07Using Excel again.

05:09The error is too big.

05:12How many seconds is there?

05:13But he admitted it was a scientific crime investigation.

05:16It should be.

05:18This is bad.

05:21Nusamran Subandi.

05:23This is bad.

05:25A doctor.

05:26It's wrong to go back.

05:28Even though this involves human life.

05:31A criminal.

05:33From 1620 to 1639,

05:35he admitted that it was very bad.

05:38He admitted that he saw a laboratory of toxicology.

05:41It's all gone.

05:43The calculations are destroyed.

05:45Why isn't there anyone there?

05:48That laboratory.

05:50It's all gone.

05:51Why don't we laugh at Ethiopia like this?

05:54This is bad.

05:56Maybe Ethiopia or Gambia or Ghana

05:59won't be destroyed like this.

06:01A doctor of toxicology.

06:03It's wrong to go back.

06:04It's bad to determine human life.

06:06This is bad.

06:07Hopefully this will be made into a magazine.

06:09So that people will be called to court.

06:12How can he be 1639?

06:16Even though the calculation should be according to his model.

06:19It should be 1620.

06:21How can there be 19 minutes?

06:23The difference is

06:25the manual calculation.

06:27The doctor is wrong.

06:29There is no validation test.

06:32The sample should be 10.

06:34Usually 70-30%.

06:3770 for training,

06:3930 for validation.

06:41Leave the sample for validation.

06:43Like that.

06:44So, 7, 3.

06:46Or if your data is 100 samples,

06:4870, 30 for validation.

06:5070 for training or validation.

06:52That's how the mathematical model should be.

06:54Not 100% data for modeling or training.

06:59Data for validation or validation test.

07:03Whether your model is correct or not.

07:05This is a doctor.

07:07Gosh.

07:08This is how a quality doctor is now.

07:11It's bad.

07:16It's bad.

07:17Okay, viewers.

07:18Let's watch.

07:23His deception in the trial.

07:25Imagine with self-confidence.

07:27He got 139.

07:28Then, he made a standard deviation.

07:301630, 1645.

07:32The deviation is about 50 minutes.

07:36It's bad.

07:39After the test, he doesn't want to do it anymore.

07:41He's apologizing.

07:42He's stupid.

07:45He's caught.

07:46He's broken.

07:47Your father is a product of science.

07:49Your father is a product.

07:53He can't even do the math.

07:55He's a doctor.

07:57He's a doctor.

07:59Imagine.

08:00In high school, we already learned

08:04how quadratic is.

08:06There's a curve.

08:07There's a vertex.

08:11That's how quadratic is.

08:13Then, if the parabola is open,

08:16plus ax2,

08:18for example,

08:19plus positive a,

08:20ax2, plus bx, plus c.

08:22If the a is positive,

08:23what is the curve?

08:25The parabola is open.

08:26So, it forms a curve.

08:28When it goes down, it goes up again.

08:30It's so bad.

08:32In high school, he didn't pass.

08:34He was made to be used by Krishnamurti.

08:37And Tito Karnavian for his wealth.

08:40So, it's so bad.

08:42These mafias.

08:44They should be ashamed.

08:46Samrat Subandi is a doctor.

08:48He uses quadratic mathematical model.

08:53Mathematical model.

08:55The parabola is open.

08:56There's no scientist

08:59who uses quadratic.

09:02Only high school students understand that.

09:04Or high school students, maybe.

09:06Calculating manually is wrong.

09:08They don't use a program or application.

09:10Instead, they use Excel.

09:13It's so bad.

09:16It's so bad.

09:18Admit it.

09:19What's the scientific name?

09:21Just use Excel.

09:23It's for the office.

09:25It's crazy.

09:27It's so bad.

09:29I don't know what's wrong with people's computers.

09:31It's matched.

09:3316.2.

09:35It should be 16.20.

09:37Instead, it's 16.39.

09:39It's so bad.

09:42Okay, viewers.

09:44We've heard the video.

09:46Okay, see you

09:48in our next video.

09:50Okay, watch the video

09:52of this doctor.

09:55Okay, bye.

09:57See you in our next video.

10:20120 days is...

10:22120 hours.

10:24120 hours.

10:26It's seen.

10:28Then it's formed in a curve.

10:32This curve.

10:34Descending curve.

10:36It's not a linear curve.

10:38In language.

10:40It's not linear.

10:42It's a bit parabolic.

10:44So,

10:46then we form

10:48what is it?

10:50We find the regression

10:52through

10:54mathematical calculation.

10:56Now, it's the easiest.

10:58We use Excel.

11:00We can use Excel.

11:02Then from here,

11:04we can calculate

11:06at what point,

11:08how many hours

11:10was used to release

11:12that much.

11:14Release that much cyanide.

11:16How long was it?

11:18So, it's at the back.

11:20We find it.

11:22Yes.

11:24We find the time.

11:26From there,

11:28we get

11:3030 hours,

11:329 minutes,

11:3436 seconds.

11:4090 hours.

11:4290 hours,

11:449 minutes,

11:4636 seconds.

11:48We repeat that.

11:50Then, we plot

11:52from the starting point, we measure

11:54this material in the laboratory.

11:56When we measure this material

11:58in the laboratory,

12:00the data is still there.

12:02Then,

12:04we measure the data.

12:06We calculate from there to the back.

12:10Reduce that much hours.

12:12Then, we reach

12:14from the measurement

12:16at

12:18around 10 o'clock.

12:20What time was it?

12:22What time?

12:2610.30 p.m.

12:28Calculate it back

12:30by

12:32reducing

12:3490 hours,

12:369 minutes, 36 seconds

12:38to the point

12:42at

12:4416.30 p.m.

12:48past

12:5039.

12:5236 seconds.

12:56This is the point

12:58we get from there.

13:00So, it's a simulation

13:02to produce that.

13:04Simulation to produce that time.

13:06Simulation to produce that time.

13:08But,

13:10there is a calculation.

13:12There is a calculation called

13:14Standard Deficit.

13:16So, to prevent that

13:18from coming out,

13:20we make a

13:22calculation.

13:24The calculation

13:26falls to

13:2816.30 p.m. to 16.45 p.m.

13:30That's the time.

13:32That's the time.

13:34That's the time.

13:36That's the time.

13:38Not the time

13:40we calculate

13:42from the time we measure it

13:44until the end.

13:4616.30 p.m. to 16.45 p.m.

13:48So, to sum up,

13:52to prevent that

13:54from coming out,

13:56we make a calculation

13:5816.30 p.m. to 16.45 p.m.

14:00The point we get

14:02from the simulation calculation is

14:04how many?

14:0616.00 p.m.

14:08past

14:1039 minutes

14:12and 36 seconds.

14:14That's what I can explain.

14:16What day is that?

14:18This is because we calculate it backwards.

14:20It's

14:226th January.

14:266th January,

14:282016.

14:30Wednesday.

14:32Wednesday.

14:34So, the time delay

14:36I read it,

14:38the time delay of NRCN

14:40in the cup of coffee

14:42is between 16.30 p.m.

14:44to 16.45 p.m.

14:46That's the conclusion

14:48of the simulation

14:50on Wednesday,

14:526th January, 2016.

14:58Next,

15:00are there any

15:02experiments

15:04that were

15:06done

15:08in the

15:10report?

15:12They were done in the report.

15:14By the toxicology team.

15:16By the toxicology team.

15:18By the toxicology team.

15:26Let's continue, sir.

15:28This is a general question.

15:30What is your dissertation about?

15:32My dissertation is about

15:34what I just said.

15:36So, the title of my dissertation

15:38in my doctorate is

15:40Development of

15:42Scientific Investigation

15:44to Prove

15:46Blast and Signet Fishing Cases.

16:00Development of

16:02Scientific Investigation

16:04to Prove

16:06Blast and Signet Fishing Cases.

16:30Development of

16:32Scientific Investigation

16:34to Prove

16:36Blast and Signet Fishing Cases.

17:00Development of

17:02Scientific Investigation

17:04to Prove

17:06Blast and Signet Fishing Cases.

17:08Development of

17:10Scientific Investigation

17:12to Prove

17:14Blast and Signet Fishing Cases.

Category

Transcript

Recommended