Ririn, Murderer of a Family in Indramayu, Sentenced to Death; Judge Reveals Shocking Facts About Her Role

The Panel of Judges at the Indramayu District Court declared that defendant Ririn Rifanto played a direct role in the premeditated murder of five members of a family in Paoman Village, Indramayu Regency, West Java.

Chief Judge Wimmy D. Simarmata, while reading the verdict in Indramayu on Wednesday, stated that the conclusion was based on witness testimony, evidence, and legal facts revealed during the trial.

‘The defendant’s actions were not spontaneous or the result of an uncontrollable situation, but rather a series of actions carried out consciously, purposefully, and prepared in advance,’ he said.

The judge assessed that Ririn, together with another defendant, Priyo Bagus Setiawan, had first agreed to kill the victims’ family with the aim of seizing their property. According to the judge, the two suspects prepared an iron hammer as the crime weapon, determined the method of execution, went to the victims’ house together, and then carried out their respective roles during the murder.

Based on trial data, the panel of judges stated that both defendants went to the victims’ house in Paoman Village, Indramayu, on 29 August 2025. The judge said Priyo took the hammer from the vehicle and handed it to Ririn to be used in carrying out the murder.

‘From this series of actions, a close cooperative relationship and unity of will between the defendant and Priyo Bagus Setiawan is evident,’ he stated.

The judge said Ririn struck Budi Awaludin with the hammer. The same was done to Sahroni, Euis Juwitasari, and the victims’ child with the initials RK (7) until they were incapacitated. ‘Meanwhile, Priyo Bagus Setiawan took the victims’ child (an eight-month-old baby) to the bathroom until the baby drowned,’ he said.

He explained that after the victims were incapacitated, Ririn and Priyo took two mobile phones, one laptop, the victims’ gold jewellery, and an ID card in the name of Budi Awaludin. The judge also noted that Ririn remained in the victims’ house until around 01:26 WIB, then took the victims’ car with Priyo to continue their series of actions.

The panel of judges therefore rejected the defendant’s defence claiming she had no malicious intent. The judge stated that intent must be proven through the sequence of actions before, during, and after the crime occurred.