Rahmat Wibowo published an article suggesting that named high-achieving students became unwilling witnesses or collateral damage in an anonymous harassment campaign, linking their names and casual social-media interactions to a crime through insinuation that implies guilt by association.
| ID | ev-20260609-006 |
|---|---|
| Targets | Graciella Valeska Liander |

Transcript
When Your Friend Turns Out to Be the
Harasser: The Uncomfortable Truth About
Guilt by Association
When Your Friend ---
Turns Out to Be the
Dumb Anonymous
Harasser: , Graciella
Valeska Liander,
Galuh Mawarni
Matahariputri,
Theodore
Maximillan Jonathan
Follow
What happens to the top students, the
high achievers, the campus legends,
when someone they call a friend starts
an anonymous harassment campaign?
They become unwilling witnesses to a
crime, and sometimes, collateral
damage in someone else's downfall.
Let me tell you about three people. High
achievers. The kind of people Indonesia
is supposed to be proud of. The kind of
people who represent the best of what
our universities can produce. Each of
them built something remarkable. Each
of them earned their place. And each of
them ended up connected, in some way,
to a story they probably wish they were
not part of.
The People Involved
bay
tik : nr oo
Para Gen Z Penembus Batas dari Beasiswa
Teladan
@ piTawa V3 serie
Presto! Mehosime
Juara 3
Pemilihan Mahasiswa Berprestasi
Tingkat ITB Tahun 2023
Selomat kepada
Galuh Mawarni
Matahariputri
Fakultas Seni Rupe don Desoin
(FSRD)
Three people, three different faculties,
three genuine achievements. Theodore,
in particular, represents something
remarkable: maintaining a 3.94 GPA
through his bachelor's in Electrical
Engineering at ITB, then pushing that
even further to 3.96 in his master's, all
while building a career path into banking
and project management. This is not
someone who coasted. This is someone
who worked. And then there is a fourth
variable in this story: a digital
harassment campaign, anonymous
accounts, targeted attacks, and a public
trail that connects all of them, not as
perpetrators, but as people who were
there, people who knew, and people
whose names are now attached to a
case file they did not sign up for.
The anatomy of becoming an unwilling
witness
When someone in your social circle, a
friend, a classmate, a person you once
took a selfie with at a cafe, starts using
anonymous accounts to harass others,
you do not get a warning. You do not get
a memo that says "your reputation is
about to be adjacent to a crime."
What you get instead is a screenshot.
Then another. Then a thread. Then a
doxxing incident. And by the time the
dust settles, your name is in the
conversation, not because you did
anything, but because you were there.
This is not a hypothetical. The
harassment campaign referenced here
resulted in public posts, identifiable
targets, and formal documentation.
When anonymous accounts are used to
intimidate, defame, or expose private
information, that is a crime under
Indonesian law, specifically UU ITE No.
1/2024 and KUHP 2023. The people who
knew and said nothing, who reposted,
who laughed, who replied with jokes
about jailtime, all of them become part
of the story.
What the digital record shows
Social media is unforgiving. A tweet from
2022 saying "sini" under a mutual's
post. A reply from 2023 that got 871
impressions. A photo of lunch together
that was supposed to be casual. In the
age of screenshots, everything becomes
evidence of something, even if that
something is just "| knew this person."
@dombolord, Jul 8, 2022
"sini" (come here)
A casual tweet. Two letters in
Indonesian. Now part of a digital
footprint in a harassment case.
@granoli... (reply), Oct 23, 2023
By garu(ss*
g
Expressing hope for legal consequences
against @RayhanAsadell, with 871
impressions and 2 reposts.
871 impressions. A reply in a harassment
thread. Reposted by accounts
connected to the same social circle.
The point is not to assign blame to
people who left casual comments. The
point is that digital participation in a
harassment narrative, even tangential
participation, leaves a mark. And for high
achievers whose professional brand is
their most valuable asset, that mark
costs something real.
The Dunning-Kruger problem at the center
of this
Here is what | have observed in
Indonesian startup and campus culture:
there is a category of person who has
just enough skill to appear credible, but
not enough self-awareness to
understand the consequences of their
actions. They build an identity on
bravado. They think anonymous
accounts are untraceable. They think the
digital world is separate from the legal
world.
They are wrong on all counts. And the
people around them, the Graciellas, the
Theodores, the Galuhs, the ones who
actually built something real, end up
answering questions they should never
have been asked. A person who holds a
3.96 master's GPA from ITB should not
have their name mentioned in the same
sentence as a harassment investigation.
But here we are.
What we have learned about guilt by
association
Proximity to a harasser does not make
you a harasser. But it does make you a
witness, and witnesses get subpoenaed.
Your digital footprint does not forget
casual associations. A repost, a reply, a
shared photo, all of it can be read as
endorsement after the fact.
Being the best student in your faculty,
even with a near-perfect GPA, does not
exempt you from being asked "what did
you know and when did you know it?"
In Indonesia, defamation, electronic
harassment, and doxxing carry real
criminal and civil liability under UU ITE,
KUHP 2023, and UU PDP.
A message to the high achievers in the
wrong rooms
If you are a top student, a scholarship
recipient, a campus award winner,
someone who maintained a 3.9-
something GPA across six or more years
of engineering school, and someone in
your circle is doing something that looks
like it could become a police report, you
need to make a decision now. Not later.
Not when the screenshot surfaces. Now.
The people featured in this article built
real things. A media presence. A career
in banking. A campus legacy in art and
design. None of that disappears
overnight because of someone else's
bad decisions. But it does get
complicated. And complicated is
expensive, in time, in attention, in
reputation.
The cost of staying silent is that you
become a character in someone else's
story. The cost of speaking up early is
temporary discomfort. Choose your
uncomfortable moment wisely.
What should have happened instead
When you see a friend starting to use
anonymous accounts to target
someone, when you see the language
escalating, when you notice the
harassment is crossing into doxxing
territory, the responsible thing is not to
repost and add laughing emojis. The
responsible thing is to disengage,
document, and if you are legally
exposed, consult someone who knows
Indonesian digital law.
At Infraloka, we work on legal tech tools
precisely because the gap between
"what is legal" and "what people think is
legal online" is enormous in Indonesia.
Somasi as a Service exists because
most people do not know they have
actionable recourse until it is too late.
And most unwilling witnesses do not
know they need to protect themselves
until they are already in the
conversation.
Know your rights. Know the law. And
know who you are choosing to stand
next to.
#Indonesia #Digitallaw
#OnlineHarassment #UUITE #LegalTech
#Infraloka #CampusCulture #GenZ #ITB
#Doxxing #SomasiAsAService
#Professionallntegrity #DigitalFootprint
#AccountabilityMatters