ANALISIS TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA BERDASARKAN PUTUSAN PENGADILAN NEGERI MAKASSAR REGISTER PERKARA NO.816/PID.SUS/2023/PN. Mks.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of legal proceedings, courts evaluate factors that may mitigate the sentences given to defendants, such as cooperation with law enforcement, admission of guilt, and repentance. The aim is to balance justice with efforts to reform defendants' behavior.This research analyzes drug offenses based on the verdict of the Makassar District Court in case number 816/Pid.Sus/2023/PN. Mks. The study employs a normative juridical approach to assess the application of law in cases of drug abuse, focusing particularly on the court's decision.The findings reveal that the Makassar District Court's verdict in this case was deemed ineffective as the imposed punishment did not deter the perpetrator, despite clear evidence that the defendant, Risman Jalali Alias Chris, committed a criminal offense involving Class I narcotics for purposes other than personal use, as alleged. Therefore, the defendant received a sentence of 1 year and 6 months in prison, with the time spent in pretrial detention deductedThis evaluation highlights challenges in law enforcement, rehabilitation, and efforts to prevent drug abuse. Prevention and educational initiatives are crucial to reducing drug-related crimes. Therefore, comprehensive approaches are necessary, encompassing effective law enforcement, holistic rehabilitation programs, and sustained efforts in prevention and education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it