Facts Behind the 6-Year Sentence for Radit in the Unram Student Murder Case

The six-year prison sentence handed down to Radiet Adiansyah, known as Radit, for the death of University of Mataram (Unram) student Ni Made Vaniradya Puspa Nitra triggered dramatic scenes at the Mataram District Court on Wednesday. Hysterical crying erupted from both sides of the family, whilst the panel of judges was itself divided over who was responsible for taking the victim’s life at Nipah Beach, North Lombok, West Nusa Tenggara. The panel of judges at the Mataram District Court sentenced Radit to six years in prison. ‘Sentencing the defendant to six years in prison,’ said Presiding Judge Mukhlassuddin. The judge declared Radit proven to have committed assault causing the victim’s death under Article 466, paragraph (3) of Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code. ‘Adjudicating, declaring the defendant legally and convincingly proven guilty of committing the criminal act of assault causing death as per the public prosecutor’s second alternative charge,’ he said. The sentence was lighter than the prosecutors’ demand, which had sought 13 years for a murder charge. The case occurred on Tuesday, 26 August 2025, at Nipah Beach in the Pemenang sub-district, North Lombok. Initially, Radit claimed that he and the victim were victims of a robbery. However, the police investigation subsequently named Radit as a suspect. The incident allegedly began when Radit attempted to rape the victim. The victim resisted, leading to a fight between them. The verdict immediately provoked a strong reaction from the defendant’s family. Radit’s mother, Makkiyati, screamed hysterically in the courtroom. ‘My son is innocent, Sir,’ she shouted. Police officers on guard immediately secured the situation and escorted Makkiyati out of the courtroom. ‘Radit is not guilty,’ she said, pointing towards the judge. According to Makkiyati, the injuries to the victim’s genitals were not caused by her son. ‘Vira had a previous injury on her genitals. Before she got to know my son, Vira already had an injury. So, she was no longer a virgin,’ she said, crying hysterically. Outside the courtroom, Radit’s family became hysterical again. One family member was even seen fainting. ‘They are liars, the Public Prosecutor is a liar. I curse you all. That prosecutor is a liar, a murderer,’ said Makkiyati. Tears also came from the victim’s family. The victim’s mother, Ning Purnamawati, said she could not accept the six-year sentence for Radit. ‘As a mother, I cannot accept that my child’s life is valued at only six years. Where is the justice? I will never see my child again. Is that the price of a human being?’ expressed Ning after the session. According to Ning, the sentence was not commensurate with her child’s life. ‘I only want justice. My child was brutally murdered, but only gets six years. That is the extent to which they value my child’s life,’ she added. The Head of Public Information at the NTB High Prosecutor’s Office, Muhammad Harun Al Rasyid, said prosecutors are still considering their next legal step. ‘We will discuss it with our leadership, we will convey everything to determine our next legal recourse,’ he said. The prosecution has seven days to decide its stance. ‘Regarding the verdict, the public prosecutor’s stance is still under consideration. There are still seven days. We will convey to our leadership what legal recourse to take against this verdict,’ he added. Meanwhile, Radit’s legal counsel, Kusnaini, confirmed that his team would appeal. ‘We will definitely appeal. We will pursue an appeal,’ he said. ‘We believe that Radit must be freed. Because he is a victim and he is not guilty,’ added Kusnaini. In the ruling, two ad hoc judges were convinced that Radit was the party who took the victim’s life. The panel consisted of Mukhlassuddin as the presiding judge, with Rosihan Luthfi and Made Hermayanti Muliartha as ad hoc judges. The ad hoc judges assessed there was no evidence pointing to a robbery as Radit had previously claimed. ‘Because that person intended to seize the property of the defendant and the victim, that person would have taken the defendant’s and victim’s belongings,’ said ad hoc judge Rosihan Luthfi. The ad hoc judges also considered the testimony of a witness who visited Radit at Bhayangkara Hospital. ‘The witness’s testimony when visiting the defendant at Bhayangkara Hospital, the defendant reportedly said, ’sorry, yes, I have taken your friend away’,’ he stated. In addition, the ad hoc judges took into account the victim’s mother’s testimony regarding Radit’s communication with the victim’s younger sibling via Instagram. ‘Indirectly proves that there was a feeling of guilt towards the victim and acknowledges the defendant committed the act,’ he mentioned. In contrast to the two ad hoc judges, Presiding Judge Mukhlassuddin stated that Radit was not the perpetrator who took the victim’s life. ‘Considering, we do not agree with the opinion of members one and two,’ he said. According to Mukhlassuddin, there is a third party who must be held responsible for the incident. ‘There is a third party who must be held accountable for this incident,’ he said. He also considered the prosecutor’s construction regarding how the defendant buried the victim’s head in the sand to be an assumption. ‘We agree with the legal counsel that the defendant Radit is not proven to have committed a criminal act as per the first or second alternative charges of the public prosecutor. Therefore, the defendant should be acquitted of all charges from the public prosecutor,’ he said. Nevertheless, Mukhlassuddin still declared Radit proven to have committed assault causing the victim’s death. ‘Adjudicating, declaring the defendant legally and convincingly proven guilty of committing the criminal act of assault causing death as per the public prosecutor’s second alternative charge,’ he said.