The practice of money doubling by shamans or psychics remains a persistent social
phenomenon in Indonesia that frequently escalates into serious criminal acts,
including premeditated murder. This study examines whether the role of the victim
in Supreme Court Decision Number 1023 K/Pid/2018 was considered by the judges
in imposing criminal sanctions upon the defendant. Employing a normative legal
research method with a legislative, conceptual, and case study approach, this study
analyzes primary and secondary legal materials qualitatively. The findings reveal
that the victims in this case may be classified under the victimological typologies of
the dull normals and the acquisitive, whose characteristics and behavior
contributed to both primary victimization through fraud and secondary victimization through premeditated murder. Nevertheless, the Panel of Judges neither at the first instance level nor at the cassation level explicitly incorporated
the victim's role as a mitigating factor. This outcome is attributable to the limited jurisdictional scope of the Supreme Court as judex juris, the absence of victim-
oriented consideration at the trial court level, and the normative barrier imposed by Article 70 paragraph (2) of Law Number 1 of 2023.