Prosecutors Accuse Student Murderer at Nipah Beach of Playing Victim

Public prosecutors have accused Radiet Adiansyah, also known as Radit, the defendant in the murder of university student Ni Made Vaniradya Puspa Nitra at Nipah Beach, North Lombok, of playing the victim and feigning righteousness. The accusation arose because Radit appeared to act as though he were innocent, notably bringing a Qur’an to every court session.

Furthermore, the prosecution revealed that Radit has consistently attempted to deflect blame by naming others as the perpetrators. “The defendant constantly claims that others are the culprits by drawing sketches of unknown faces, yet these claims are not supported by sufficient evidence,” stated prosecutor Sulviany during the sentencing reading at the Mataram District Court on Tuesday (2/6/2026).

According to Sulviany, no traces of other individuals were found at the crime scene. Only the DNA of Radit and Vaniradya was present at the location. “Consequently, the defendant’s testimony in court stands alone as a rejection of the prosecution’s charges, without being supported by convincing or admissible evidence,” Sulviany explained.

Sulviany described Radit’s behaviour in court as unnatural and ‘acrobatic’. The prosecution also highlighted Radit’s habit of bringing the Qur’an to every hearing and his lack of empathy towards the victim’s family. “He shows a lack of empathy towards the family of Ni Made Vaniradya Puspa Nitra by frequently bringing holy books to every session, which creates the impression that the defendant is the most pious and devout person in this trial,” Sulviany alleged.

“However, we believe the opposite; this is merely a strategy used by the defendant to cover his actions and gain sympathy. In criminal justice practice, it is common for perpetrators to act as if they are victims of injustice or victims of criminalisation by law enforcement,” Sulviany added.

The prosecution remains convinced that Radit is the perpetrator of Vaniradya’s murder, based on witness testimony, expert evidence, and physical evidence. Crucially, at the time of the incident, only the victim and the defendant were present at the crime scene. “There was no one else, meaning only the defendant had the capacity, capability, and probability at the scene to have the ability and opportunity to engage in a physical struggle. Therefore, the defendant strangled the victim, Ni Made Vaniradya Puspa Nitra,” Sulviany clarified.

Sulviany emphasised that only Radit had the opportunity and ability to commit the murder. Based on forensic laboratory results, digital evidence, and physical evidence from the scene, only the DNA of the victim and the defendant was found.

Radit’s mother, Makkiyati, refuted the prosecutor’s claims that her son is a murderer or is playing the victim by bringing the Qur’an. According to Makkiyati, Radit has been diligent in his religious studies since childhood. “He has always studied the Qur’an; do not underestimate the holy verses. My son is not a murderer,” Makkiyati stated in the Mataram District Courtroom.