Denpasar, Bali – An Indonesian court on Monday sentenced three Australian citizens to prison for the June 2025 murder of Zivan Radmanovic, a 32-year-old man from Melbourne. The case, which has drawn international attention, centers around a targeted attack that went tragically wrong, resulting in Radmanovic’s death and the wounding of another man.
Mevlut Coskun, 22, and Paea I Middlemore Tupou, 27, each received 16-year sentences at the Denpasar District Court, while Darcy Jenson, 24, was sentenced to 12 years in prison. The three men were convicted of the premeditated murder of Radmanovic, who was fatally shot during a birthday celebration in Bali. The court heard that the attack stemmed from a debt collection attempt targeting another individual, Sanar Ghanim, who was also present at the villa.
According to court documents, Coskun and Tupou claimed they were hired to intimidate Ghanim into repaying a debt to an unidentified Australian man. They stated they did not intend to kill Radmanovic, alleging the shooting occurred during a chaotic situation. Though, prosecutors argued that Jenson orchestrated the attack, with Coskun and Tupou carrying it out. The court ultimately found the three men guilty of premeditated murder and weapons possession.
Radmanovic was in Bali celebrating his wife, Jazmyn Gourdeas’s, birthday alongside her sister and Ghanim, her sister’s partner, when the attack occurred on June 14, 2025. A coroner’s report revealed Radmanovic died from three gunshot wounds and blunt force trauma. Ghanim was also shot and beaten but survived the assault. ABC News reports that the family of Radmanovic expressed disappointment with the sentences, believing they were too lenient.
Details of the Investigation and Arrests
The investigation into Radmanovic’s murder led to arrests across multiple countries. Jenson was apprehended at Jakarta’s Soekarno Hatta airport in June 2025 while attempting to flee Indonesia. Coskun and Tupou were later arrested with the assistance of Interpol in Singapore and Cambodia, respectively. Investigators identified a key figure known only as “Mr. X,” who allegedly issued the instructions for the attack, but their identity remains unknown. The Associated Press detailed the international scope of the investigation.
During the trial, which began in October 2025, the defendants testified they were offered payment to travel to Bali and threaten Ghanim. They claimed they feared for their families’ safety and refused to reveal the identity of the man who hired them. The court accepted that the men acted in response to a “promised payment,” but ultimately found them guilty of premeditated murder.
Sentencing and Reaction
While prosecutors had requested 18-year sentences for Coskun and Tupou and a 17-year sentence for Jenson, the panel of three judges handed down lesser sentences. Presiding Judge Wayan Suarta explained the decision, noting the defendants had no prior criminal records and had cooperated with the investigation. He stated the punishment was intended as a deterrent, not as an act of revenge, and acknowledged the defendants’ potential for rehabilitation. The Sydney Morning Herald reported on the family’s reaction to the sentencing.
The family of Zivan Radmanovic has expressed their dismay at the sentences, with their lawyer, Sary Latief, calling them “disgustingly light.” Latief argued the sentences send a dangerous message, suggesting Bali is a safe haven for criminals. The sentences are significantly shorter than the life sentences sought by the family.
What’s Next
The sentencing concludes the criminal proceedings against Coskun, Tupou, and Jenson. However, the case remains open regarding the identity of “Mr. X,” the individual who allegedly orchestrated the attack. Indonesian authorities have not publicly disclosed any further leads in identifying this person. The incident has also raised concerns about safety and security for tourists in Bali, prompting calls for increased vigilance and stricter law enforcement. News USA Today provides further coverage of the sentencing.
This case serves as a stark reminder of the potential dangers faced by travelers and the complexities of international crime. We encourage readers to share their thoughts on this case and its implications in the comments below.
