Betrand Peto Email Access Complaint Draws Denial From Sarwendah as Private Videos Spread

Police complaint centers on private photos and videos

Ruben Onsu filed a police complaint at Polda Metro Jaya in the early hours of October 11, 2026, alleging unauthorized access to the email account of singer Betrand Peto and the removal and distribution of private photographs and videos. His lawyer, Minola Sebayang, identified the complaint as STTLP/B/7627/X2026 and said Ruben acted under a formal authorization from Betrand, who accompanied him to the police station.

The dispute concerns footage that circulated on social media showing a gathering with friends and, according to reports, alcoholic drinks. Betrand, also known as Onyo, says the material was private, had never been posted or shared by him, and was edited together in a way that misrepresented the gathering.

Minola says checks of the account and attempts to recover access revealed a connection to an email address and two telephone numbers that Betrand believed belonged to Sarwendah, Ruben's former wife. Sarwendah's lawyer, Pablo Benua, denies that she hacked the account. He says her email had been linked to Betrand's account since Betrand lived with her.

That disagreement is central to the case: the parties dispute whether the account connection indicates unauthorized activity or an existing arrangement. The allegation has not been established as a police finding or court ruling. Identifying an address associated with an account is also different from establishing who accessed it, what they retrieved and whether they passed material to others.

What Ruben and Betrand reported

Speaking in Kuningan, South Jakarta, on October 12, Minola described two alleged acts within the email complaint. The first was entering Betrand's private account and taking photographs, videos or other data without permission. The second was giving that material to others for publication.

Minola's account places permission at the center of both allegations. He argues that knowing the owner of private material does not give someone the right to take or distribute it. The complaint therefore extends beyond the claim that someone entered an email account: it also concerns how private content allegedly reached public social media accounts.

The complaint number appears in several forms in reports. The fullest version is STTLP/B/7627/X2026, while other accounts use STTLP/B/7627, STTLPB/7627 or STTLP B7627. These are presented as references to the same email access complaint, rather than evidence of separate email cases.

A police report records an allegation submitted for examination. It does not, by itself, prove the reported conduct or establish the responsibility of a person named in it. No specific statutory provision or charging decision has been identified in the public accounts of this complaint.

How Betrand says he discovered the account connection

According to Minola, Betrand became suspicious after private material that he had kept in his account appeared online. He then tried to determine who had most recently accessed his data. Minola says the checks, including account recovery procedures, brought up an associated email address and two telephone numbers.

The lawyer says Betrand recognized those contact details as belonging to Sarwendah. That attribution comes from Betrand's understanding of the account information, as relayed by his lawyer. It is not an independently established identification of whoever accessed the account.

The descriptions of the contact details are not consistent across reports. Some print a complete email address, while another uses a masked address that cannot be confidently matched to it. The two telephone numbers also appear with different masking patterns. Those differences prevent a reliable comparison of the underlying identifiers.

The public account of the checks does not specify whether the contact details appeared as recovery information, an account association or a record of a recent login. These are different kinds of information. A recovery address can help restore access to an account, but its presence alone does not show that its owner downloaded or distributed a particular file.

Betrand says the footage was old and edited

Betrand addressed the circulating material after questioning at Polda Metro Jaya on the evening of October 8, 2026, three days before Ruben filed the email complaint. He asserted that someone had broken into his email and said the footage was old and had been edited together.

Describing the gathering, Betrand said it involved friends from eastern Indonesia, a soccer game and a meal of papeda, a sago dish. He said the images circulating online did not present the full occasion and were unrelated to the legal matter he was facing at the time.

Betrand, the singer whose private material is at the center of the complaint, said he had kept it for himself rather than publishing it:

Jadi aku bisa bilang kenapa itu dibobol, karena itu enggak pernah kuposting ke mana-mana untuk simpan buat pribadiku saja. Share ke grup juga atau ke teman-teman juga aku enggak ada nge-share itu.

In English, his explanation was that he suspected a break in because he had never posted the material anywhere and had not shared it in a group or with friends. That explains his suspicion, but does not independently establish how the material left the account.

Reports describe alcoholic drinks in the footage. That description does not establish intoxication or resolve Betrand's claim that the material was edited. No independent examination of the original files or the circulating version has been described.

Sarwendah's lawyer disputes the hacking allegation

Pablo Benua, representing Sarwendah, offered a different explanation for the linked email. Speaking in Tebet, South Jakarta, he said the connection dated from the period when Betrand lived with his client.

Pablo attributed that explanation to Sarwendah and stated:

Terkait dengan email yang tertaut, berdasarkan informasi dari klien kami, email itu tertaut sejak saudara BP ada atau tinggal bersama klien kami, Sarwendah.

His statement means that, according to Sarwendah, the email had been linked since Betrand was living with her. Pablo also said the phone Betrand used had been given to him by Sarwendah as a gift. He rejected the characterization of the account connection as hacking and questioned the evidence and motive behind the accusation.

That response challenges the inference Ruben's legal team draws from the linked contact information. It does not resolve whether any later access occurred, whether such access was authorized or who distributed the files. Those issues require evidence beyond the existence of an account connection.

Pablo also said the circulating video did not show Betrand's face and questioned its relevance to an alleged attempt to damage his reputation. This differs from descriptions identifying the material as footage of Betrand with friends. Without an authenticated original and a precise identification of the clips each side is discussing, that disagreement remains unresolved.

Seven accounts are accused of distributing material

Minola says approximately seven social media accounts published or circulated the private material. His allegation separates the suspected acquisition of the files from their later appearance online, leaving open the possibility that different people were involved at different stages.

The account names differ slightly between reports. One list names OKT Fives, Endra, Dreamora13, Ahmad Dojali, Gen5, Nyata Media and XVG.id. Another gives OKT Vibes, Endra, Dream Mora 13, Ahmad Dojali, Gen 5, Nyata Media and xvg.id. The variation between OKT Fives and OKT Vibes is especially relevant because the two names cannot simply be assumed to identify the same account.

These accounts are identified in allegations from Ruben's legal team, not in a published police finding. Being accused of posting material is also distinct from being accused of entering the email account. Establishing the route from private storage to public posts would require connecting those separate events.

Two other legal issues must be kept separate

Ruben made two police reports on October 11 at different times, according to Minola. The second concerned alleged defamation and slander arising from a recording of Ruben's video conversation with a man that circulated on social media, including through Sarwendah's account.

That second report is separate from the complaint about Betrand's email. The statement that there were two police reports should not be confused with Minola's description of two alleged acts within the email case: unauthorized access and subsequent distribution.

The footage of Betrand also circulated amid a separate allegation of sexual violence reported by a woman identified as ANW, aged 26. Betrand discussed the footage after police questioning on October 8 and said it had no connection to that matter.

The existence of that separate allegation does not establish the truth of the email complaint, and the circulation of private footage does not establish the sexual violence allegation. No outcome of the ANW complaint is given in the accounts of these events.

How the events unfolded

The reported dates place Betrand's public explanation before the email complaint and Minola's detailed account after it:

• October 8, 2026: Betrand spoke after questioning at Polda Metro Jaya, asserted that his email had been accessed and disputed the presentation of the circulating footage.
• Early October 11, 2026: Ruben, accompanied by Betrand and lawyers, filed the email access complaint at Polda Metro Jaya under Betrand's authorization.
• October 11, 2026: Ruben filed a separate complaint concerning the circulation of a recording of his video conversation.
• October 12, 2026: Minola described the complaints, linked account information and alleged distribution of private material in South Jakarta.

Pablo's denial was delivered in Tebet, South Jakarta, but an exact date for that statement is not specified. The date of the original gathering and the first publication of the disputed footage are also not established.

What remains unresolved

Betrand is described as ready to serve as a key witness in the email case. His participation could address how he stored the material, who had permission to access it and what he saw when checking or recovering the account. His presence when the complaint was filed does not establish that investigators have already accepted his explanation.

Minola says Ruben and Betrand are leaving the legal process to police and want investigators to summon and examine people suspected of accessing or distributing the material. Their request is a call for investigation, not confirmation that those examinations have taken place.

The central unresolved issues are whether unauthorized access occurred, who was responsible, whether the private files came from the email account and how they reached the accounts accused of publication. Sarwendah's explanation of an existing email link and Betrand's account of unexpected disclosure must be assessed separately from assumptions about either party's motives.

No police examination schedule, hearing date, charging decision or deadline for further action has been announced in the accounts of the complaint. Until evidence establishes the sequence, both the hacking allegation and the denial should be understood as the positions of the parties.

Key Points

• Ruben Onsu filed an email access complaint on October 11, 2026, acting under authorization from Betrand Peto.
• The complaint alleges unauthorized access, removal of private files and their distribution through social media.
• Betrand says the circulating material was old, edited and never shared by him.
• Sarwendah's lawyer denies hacking and says her email was already linked to Betrand's account from when he lived with her.
• Reports differ on account spellings, masked contact details and the description of the footage.
• The email complaint is separate from Ruben's recording complaint and the sexual violence allegation involving ANW.
• No police finding establishing responsibility or date for further proceedings has been announced.