What Happened?

On September 14, 2025,‍ authorities in Mojokerto, East Java, Indonesia, announced details surrounding the ‍gruesome murder of Tiara Angelina Saraswati. her ‌boyfriend, Alvi Maulana, is accused of her mutilation. According to Head of Criminal Investigation Unit of⁣ mojokerto Police, AKP Fauzy Pratama, the case differs significantly ‍from typical mutilation cases due to the suspect’s psychological state.

Fauzy Pratama stated that the investigation revealed Alvi Maulana​ was experiencing a condition of ‘anomy’ – a state ⁣of normlessness ‍or ‍social deregulation – which contributed to his dehumanization of the victim. ⁢This‌ psychological state⁤ is presented as a key differentiator from other‍ mutilation cases ⁢were perpetrators are typically driven by intense anger or hatred.

The ⁤Psychological factor: Anomy and dehumanization

The concept of ‘anomy,’ originating in sociological theory, describes a breakdown of social norms and values, leading to feelings of disorientation⁢ and alienation. ​ In this⁢ case, police suggest this state contributed to ⁢Alvi Maulana’s ability to commit such ​a horrific​ act.

Dehumanization, the psychological process of⁤ stripping ⁤a person of their human ⁢qualities, is often ⁣a​ precursor to violence. Fauzy Pratama’s statement suggests that⁤ Alvi Maulana’s anomic‌ state facilitated the dehumanization of Tiara Angelina ​Saraswati, making it possible for him to inflict⁤ such extreme violence.

“The basic⁣ difference in the ⁤Mojokerto⁢ mutilation ‌case wiht mutilation in general, said Fauzy, namely in the ⁤psychological ‌condition of the‌ suspect ⁤which ‍triggered the heinous ⁣acts. In most cases of mutilation, ⁣the‌ perpetrators feel angry⁤ or excessive hate to‍ the victim so that it is not enough to​ kill,” Fauzy told detikjatim ‌ on September ⁣14, 2025.

“So that the perpetrators finally have the⁤ heart to⁢ mutilate the⁣ victims. While in this‍ case, ‍the fundamental motive that is ⁣the reason for the perpetrators (Alvi) did the act different from⁢ other cases,” he explained.

How Does ⁤This Differ‌ From Other Mutilation‍ Cases?

typically, mutilation​ is driven by strong emotional⁤ responses like rage, revenge, or‍ a desire to inflict maximum suffering. Perpetrators ​frequently enough mutilate bodies to express their ​hatred or to control the ⁣victim even after death. This case, however, points to a more detached and psychologically complex motivation rooted in a breakdown of the suspect’s internal ⁣moral compass.