Defense by Enes Güran’s Counsel for the Defendant
Law. Mustafa DEMİR
The Lawyer’s Relationship with the Bar Association and Evidence Obtained Unlawfully
First of all, we too really wanted the Diyarbakır Bar to be here, and our other colleagues to be here; at the outset, when we thought about this, we wondered whether it would stall the trial, cause a problem. Yes, this was not our kindness — we did not make this decision. The court appreciated it, the court gave the decision. However, we also requested flexibility from the court here. The reason was this: we thought that jurists would defend the law. We thought that at least, faced with a lawlessness they saw, they would intervene, they would state that it was unlawful. Unfortunately this did not, in part, happen. I will give a name, but not to point a target — please do not misunderstand this. Mr. Nahit himself said: “Yes, the fact that these prison conversations entered the file is unlawful evidence, but if it is in the file, I will ask.” That is, it does not matter to me how a piece of unlawful evidence was obtained; if it is in the file, I will ask, he said. Foreseeing that these things would not be, we thought the presence of our colleagues would be beneficial for the file, but in the process that has unfolded we saw this was not so.
The Shepherd Ahmet Matter and the Camera Footage
On other matters, too, as he himself explained — this matter of shepherd Ahmet — Presiding Judge, I also explained to you: on what day did the shepherd matter come out? Exactly on the day the letter came in saying that the DARAN-360-degree rotating cameras had not taken any recording. What a coincidence. There is a great omission, a very great omission. That the shepherd’s video came out on that same day and that no agenda arose concerning why the DARAN-360 rotating cameras were not collected — the opposite: this matter was discussed. Only “Ramazan Atasoy was taken into custody, they interrogated Ramazan Atasoy,” the news ran that way; then the shepherd was reached. I even told some of the journalists who were here, “Come, go ask the shepherd, reach him.” We do not know at all — though concerning changes in statements there is a nice thing there. I asked Erhan Güran there: “Have you ever mentioned this shepherd matter anywhere?” Because he did not understand, he said “no.” Whereas he had mentioned it. On a TV channel on which he appeared before this video even came out, he had told that, under the cameras — that is, in front of his own house — he had questioned the shepherd, having become suspicious of his behavior. So it was not an unknown, concealed matter. Indeed, you yourself missed it in the hearing minutes. When I asked you, you said “no”; whereas he had told it here, he did not conceal it. Really, look — after we entered this file, we constantly asked our clients questions. Not one of them told us a single lie. Whatever we asked, they told us truly and transparently, and in the later stages we saw they always spoke the truth. This subject is the same. That is, as my colleague Fatih said at the previous session, whatever they wanted to see, that is how it was looked at. So that is what was always seen. I will support this as I go on in the later stages. Unfortunately, I will not say the Diyarbakır Bar, but Mr. Nahit too, because he always wanted to look this way, saw it this way. But of course he did not go off into side roads.
The Contributions of the Diyarbakır Bar and Transparency
I know he did this truly in good faith. For example: the National Criminal issued a report. Because he knew that the translation there was not correct, he did not use it at all. Then, as we explained about the WhatsApp-call matter, about the slippage, they themselves also checked it, did not use it. Indeed they do not deny what they see. I accept this, they made a contribution. In the same respect, regarding the National Criminal’s footage, they sat down and spent time on the tractor. The Diyarbakır Bar really worked seriously on this file. I respect their efforts for that. They were not obliged to. They took time from their children, from their working hours, and worked on this file. That is something to respect. We too respect it. Let there be no misunderstanding. If any sharp word was exchanged at late hours, we apologize for that too — we also know how to apologize. But reciprocally. For example, you also said things that stung me. I too, in the same way, stayed until late hours. For example, I am a diabetic. Inevitably hurtful words may come out of my mouth at late hours. A colleague, Mr. Behlül, even warned me: “Brother, you are shouting.” I looked — truly he was right. I apologize, I said. Without realizing, it can happen, but the aim must lead us to a result. Look, our colleague Fatih tried to explain this.
The “Indictment of Maybes” and the Reliability of the Records
There is an anomaly here. This is truly a very extraordinary file. Because it is so extraordinary, it still continues this way. We are accusing a mother of killing her own child. An elder brother in the same way. That is, these are the two fundamental things we must look at. The Diyarbakır Bar has a Women’s Rights Center. Look at what kind of file this is. It began with an “Indictment of Maybes.” I call it the “Indictment of Maybes” because it does not say concretely “it happened like this.” Many things were brought in with the perspective “at most it must have happened like this.” Records. We explained a part of the records at the previous session. In the existing file, the difficulties Ms. Yüksel, who has fallen behind because of educational inequality, experienced — thinking in Kurdish and expressing herself in Turkish — because of the interlocutor’s failure to understand her state of mind, records were kept with the interlocutor’s personal interpretations added to what was said by a person who had previously raised a disabled child, lost that child, and has serious difficulty expressing herself; and by adding further words on top of these records, the indictment was drafted. We saw it. Although the esteemed prosecutor removed parts of these, the records still form the basis of the opinion. But can this work with records? We will see. I wanted to say this. That is, if we are going to say anything about the Diyarbakır Bar’s stance, its personality — yes, that is not our place, we know our place. I want to move on to the defense afterwards.
Criticism of the Narrowed Base-Station and the Expert Report
Now, what was the biggest ball-stopper of this indictment? The narrowed base station. Those who look at whether there has been anything like this in Turkey before — there are dozens of files. It was mentioned here yesterday too. The incident of Rojin Kabataş is still known. It could be done there too. There is also Gülistan Doku. That is, missing girls are not alone; there are many cases. Why is this not done in them and is done here? Because this file was not coming out; it would not come out by hand. Something had to be done — either a revelation would come, or something else would happen, or a magic wand would be waved, something had to happen and this file would come out. In the supplementary report the expert says, “I did not touch this file at all.” There was no chance for anyone to touch this file. In Turkey, you are going to prepare a report concerning this file — that is, even before we, as lawyers, entered the file, when clients came, we had already heard part of it. When they came, when we met with them, we looked more closely. The bar president probably was not yet here, but, as far as I know, he was still following. Because he was bar president. At that time he should have been following; everyone followed. From the Diyarbakır 8th Assize Court, probably from the moment it came to them, he knows, he follows. Before even the indictment came, before even seeing, he looked — it was surely looked at, there is no chance of not having looked…
The Reliability and Auditability of the Expert Reports
There is no chance of not having heard. Indeed, you have heard Nevzat Bahtiyar’s name. You have heard Narin Güran’s name. I am telling these. You have heard the statements there. “I did not touch this file” — the person who says this and prepares a report in this file is not telling the truth. Let no one toy with our minds. We too know what is what. We know everything. Actually you said “objection,” about the adjudication; yes, regarding your transparency and the manner in which you conducted the hearing — it could have gone very tensely, but truly you, as a panel, and my prosecutor too, took away all the tension. Thank you. Otherwise there was an acute accumulation. For example, in the first days I could not smile at all. Yesterday I too began smiling. Hence — maybe this too would become news. “Their lawyers are laughing too” — because even the laughter came up in this file. Unfortunately, I think people were expected, with yesterday’s mood, to speak and then to commit suicide, I do not know — other things were expected. Now let us come to the reports. Reports are important. Are these reports? All jurists know this. There is nothing here we can call a report. A report must first of all be auditable. Let them please — to whomever in the same field of expertise — take this report; if they can audit it, I will say nothing. This report is not auditable. That is the first element an expert report must bear. It must be auditable. When we take it to an expert in the same field of specialization: “Look, the data is this, come on, is this correct or not? You audit it. We are not saying anything.” We took it. None of them could audit it, because “It does not explain what was done here,” he said. It is not explained what was done. An additional report was requested. The supplementary report also did not explain anything. The man is verifying himself. “I behaved so carefully, believe me,” he says. You do not say it; you prepare and send it. The people who will audit will say “yes, this is obtained through reliable data in a reliable manner.” He says he did triangulation. Yesterday I mentioned — I was going to ask for something with phones.
The Triangulation Method and the Variability of Signal Strength
With iPhone-model phones — actually yesterday, coincidentally, I had submitted an article of a forensic-IT expert on this subject. There was a professor with a PhD, Mr. Levent. He was in the courtroom yesterday. Because it would get late I did not take the floor, so that things could proceed healthily. I do not know whether the esteemed bar president is still cross with me regarding iPhones. He said both that the pedometer would definitely not give an error, and that errors occur in Androids. Then let me talk about iPhones. Now iPhones give this: the signal data. You enter “*3001#12345#*” and press the call button and it comes to the screen, Presiding Judge. You can try it too.
The Errors of the Signal Strength and Triangulation Method
Now, if you look here, the signal strength constantly changes. Did you have a chance to look, I do not know. Anyone can look. In triangulation two matters are important. 1) The angle of the signal. 2) The signal strength. If, as we have said, the signal strength changes while we are standing still — yesterday Mr. Levent gave an interview to the newspaper; coincidentally he was in Diyarbakır for his own hearing and also followed this hearing. Indeed we said perhaps, if he is given the floor, his knowledge on this subject could also be consulted. Though since the courts have moved to the defense phase, I do not know whether it will take an expert opinion. The signal strength, as you can see, constantly changes in the place we are standing. Triangulation, if it is a mathematical operation to this degree — for example, it goes from 87 to 93, so the oscillation there is serious; the unit is not small. Even while stationary, I do not know how it is while moving. One must try. Here it says that pinpoint shots are made with this signal strength. If this is a mathematical operation, it is a probability calculation, because we must also consider 87, and we must also consider 93. I already explained this at the previous session. A signal comes like this, in a wave pattern. That is, it is not like a laser touching a point. It is a radio frequency. We can give many examples of this. The best example is like the waves formed in water, it comes like wave after wave. The first to arrive may be 87, and then a stronger 93 may come. It is an indicator for understanding the distance to the house, but by itself it is not sufficient. The angle likewise; here with the triangulations, a pinpoint location is formed. Yes, within that area, yes. How shall I say — as Mr. Fatih also showed yesterday with a laser on the screen, he drew a circle. “Whatever happened, happened here,” he said. Yes, whatever happened, happened there, but look, within that area there are other places. Where? A place he cannot deny. His own barn.
Nevzat Bahtiyar’s Barn and the Fertilizer-Sack Evidence
On that day Nevzat Bahtiyar took Narin to his own barn. How do we know? We have concrete data in our hands. There is a fertilizer sack. The serial number on that fertilizer sack is sequential with the sacks that came out of his barn. So the probability that he took it from there is very high. Indeed, he too, in his first statements before the prosecutor and at the interrogation, says he went to his barn. He is compelled to say it. So in fact, many things he does not say, but in the course of time he is forced to. At the hearing too, something slipped out of his mouth.
Contradictions in Nevzat Bahtiyar’s Statements and the Vehicle Matter
Our colleague did not notice; perhaps if it is pressed further, I am going to ask you to watch that recording. When our Fatih asked him about the car matter, he said “It is not for that.” Please watch that. What could it have been for? Before the question even came he said, “It is not for that.” What could it have been for? Nevzat Bahtiyar never leaves his barn. That is, I am speaking according to the narrowed base station at 15:08. I am going from material truth; no one can dispute this, because he himself says it. There is supporting ancillary evidence. The sack that came out is there. The serial numbers of the sacks that came out are sequential. This is a definite thing. That is, by itself it is not evidence. This is Nevzat Bahtiyar’s only overlapping point. That too changed, as you know. At first he said “from car to car,” then when he came to the prosecutor’s office he said “I came back with my car and went to the barn”; “the barn” then always remained. Yesterday, in fact, Mr. Fatih made a very nice Excel table, made a table. Very sound, nice. We will submit it to you in a flash drive. If you examine it, it will be understood.
The Inconsistencies in the Narrowed Base-Station Report
According to the narrowed base station, after 15:08, after Nevzat Bahtiyar leaves his house, he enters neither his house nor its outbuilding. How can this be? Because, as I said, it is a probability calculation. “I felt like it, so I did it” — a report prepared with this approach, and they expect us to trust this. I sent him only two messages. I said, look, there are two cameras. Your narrative does not match the cameras. I also said “it is not a cornfield.” There, cotton — he replied; he does not follow, but he can reply. I sent messages. I also said this in the press. He said, “I — the 1-minute — the 55 there” — the defense side also — “because of a 1-minute error, 55.” Do not mock our minds. At 18:55 yes, Salim Güran appears in front of the school; until 18:56 he says he was around Arif Güran’s house. A whole minute — “I can make a mistake” — are you mocking us? Salim Güran coming to Arif’s house with a car is already 3–4 minutes. How is this a 1-minute oscillation? He is mocking us. And he expects us to believe him. Now, to support this, it was submitted that Ruhi Kaya’s camera shows the field on the Uzunbahçe side. There is no need for this. No need, because yes, we are not experts on this subject, but when we look at the HTS records we too can understand some things. For instance, they stood up and said, “Are Uğurcan and Devran also involved in this matter?” But he knew they were not. How did the prosecutor’s office know? From PTS and from HTS it was clear. If you look at the HTS, there are Uğurcan’s HTS records in the file. Uğurcan is in Çınar at 16:00 that day — I can say this. In Çınar, because his HTS base station shows Çınar. Likewise, when Salim Güran heads toward the Uzunbahçe side, the HTS base station automatically changes. That is, “I am doing triangulation” — nonsense. It does not give a point anywhere. For example, regarding the vehicle he saw in the evening hours, it does not give a location. If you are doing triangulation, in triangulation you give an area. You give coordinates. You say “within these coordinates.” It does not say. They watched that footage. They know that they watched this footage. How do we know? We know from Nevzat’s interrogation. We know from the question asked to Nevzat. They ask Nevzat: “Did you and Salim go together to where Narin was between 22:00 and 23:00?” Why do they say this? Because having watched that footage, they say “let us produce one more piece of evidence.” This does not work, truly does not work. At some point — look, yes, very bad things have come upon this family, but law is needed for everyone. Tomorrow there is a possibility that the same things will happen to another family elsewhere. If we permit this — we must not permit, all together we must not permit. As jurists we must not permit, we must not forget. Look, the decision given here will go down in history. The words we say here, the things we do, are the traces we are leaving on history right now. The panel too, with the decision it will give at the end of the file, will leave a trace on history. Please, let us defend the law. We will only ask this of you.
Expert Competence and Request for Explanation Under the CMK
Now the expert is so specialized that he has not written what his specialization is. The court said “He is trained in this matter, he is an expert.” We will respect it. If the court said so, we will respect it — but as we said, the specialization matters are not here. We do not know. They are not on the expert lists either. We asked this: let them come; let us question the experts. As you know, under the CMK this exists. He will come; we can request an explanation regarding his report. We were going to request an explanation, we would have had questions, and I tell you, when those experts came here, we would have seen. Look — do not forget, we are jurists. As I said, we must defend the law.
The “Definitive Evidence” Claim of HTS and Narrow Base Stations and Its Rejection
As I said, a jurist, a jurist who knows the file, came out and said, after the first report, after the first hearing, “HTS and narrow base stations are definitive evidence.” Very large, very bold words. “The margin of error is zero,” he said. Then he also said, “I have not examined the report.” It is still there in the continuation of the interview. As I said, everything goes down in history. That statement of his is also there in the pages of history right now. He too will be remembered by this. Afterwards, what did the experts say in the supplementary report? They said, “I can err — by 2 meters or by 1 minute.” 2 meters, 1 minute among themselves — look, you are mocking us. In 1 minute a person can walk beyond 2 meters — on foot. I am not even talking about a vehicle. You are mocking us here, one must say, but we do not say. We continue. That jurist colleague of ours — let him just look at that statement and know why he said it so limitedly, because unfortunately those who viewed the data in this file as definitive data were also following it. Information went to the Ministry of Justice; “We know room by room,” he said. “Step by step.” If this data is coming to the Minister, it certainly does not come out of thin air — it comes from some level, a reliable source, it was probably verified. After telling this to the Minister, the expert cannot turn around and say “I made a mistake.” At least he cannot even say “My report is based on assumption.” What did he do — as was mentioned yesterday about films — there is a well-known Turkish film. Ziya says, “Lion son,” the elder brother gets angry at “9 meters.” Ziya says, “he falls” — the lion’s height now the experts have shortened. 2 meters, 1 minute. If we ask again perhaps other things will emerge, but there is no time; the adjudication flows on.
Nevzat Bahtiyar’s Movements and the Site-Inspection Request
We had mentioned the cameras. Let us not repeat — both Nevzat’s movements in the camera footage toward the place where he took Narin’s lifeless body do not match the narrowed base station in time and space. Again, there was something impossible according to the narrowed base station. We have submitted this to the file too. If Nevzat Bahtiyar was in Arif Güran’s house at 15:35 as in the narrowed base station, he does not say when he left. He says he was there until that time. Alright, let us assume he left at that time. It is not possible for him to carry out the act he described, in the way he described. We requested a site inspection on this; it was not carried out. There will be no site inspection, but, so to speak, let us call it an “amateur site inspection” — like that of TikTokers.
The Refutation of Nevzat Bahtiyar’s Body-Carrying Statement
There was a site inspection — thankfully, Beyaz TV devoted itself a bit to this business. They did a reenactment. We submitted it. There, a person does not carry a person; he carries a pillow, but it is not possible. We saw — to take a child from the house, to take the lifeless body, walk in an open area, and place her on top of the barn of one’s own house — at first that too changed. The day before, in the recordings, he said he left it from the side. He was saying “from above,” not “from the side.” He said he threw it from above. Even Mr. Yılmaz objected to this. He said — if it had been thrown from above — I even asked “was there no sound?” He remembers. He remembers very clearly. Mr. Nahit said, “Did you throw it down the chute?” “Yes, from the chute,” he said. This is all in the records. We may have made mistakes in this file, may have done things, but no one can claim this. I see it in Mr. Nahit too. I have the file very well memorized, word by word — who said what, where. If you have noticed, I take great care not to leave the hearing. That is, with full attention I listen to everything. Who said what, where. I know. Mr. Nahit — maybe this will be an attack — you brought things that are not in this file. It was said that Arif’s phone records were deleted. This is not in the file. Such a thing — again you said Osman’s phone was broken; there is no such thing in this file.
The Omissions in the Camera Footage and Technical Failures
A device that does not record. The hour the incident was officially reported is recorded as 20:43. Yes, Baran’s call is this, but first Salim called the gendarmerie at 20:18. Let us take 20:18; 20:18 is good. Because it is the earliest. Well, how is the gendarmerie able to look at 18:54? This means an omission, another situation here not being told. Look, this is not the only thing we experienced with the cameras. Our written requests have been there since before the hearing began. We submitted at least six. There is a camera called 172G. It sees the village. On the Batıkarakoç side. We insisted on it. For some reason it could not be obtained due to a technical fault. Actually, the record that came said it was obtained, but then the record that came to the court said due to a technical fault with the fiber cables at midnight, it could not be obtained. We are not saying “Nevzat Bahtiyar is definitely being tried to be protected.” Is that why it happened? But there is an omission. Yes, there is a great omission. There is a great omission in this file, and unfortunately the cover for that omission is being taken out from the Gürans. I see this. I will explain, you will see. Clear. There is no way to escape it. That is, this event is very simple — so why could we not solve it? Is there perhaps another mistake here? Is there something from our side? Instead of asking himself, he says, “We could not solve it because these are a bizarrely organized family.”
Contradictions in the Family’s Statements and Automatic Bank Payment
An organized family cannot even organize its own statements. The man does not know what he did himself. Look, yesterday it was said: Salim Güran tried to create a record with the bank receipt. The man did not remember this. We too had missed it. We formed a team among ourselves. Thankfully friends who believe in this case contributed. We also shared the files; there is a lady with us, Ms. Gülcan, a friend — we were looking at the documents together. She told me, “There is a document like this here. A bill appears. What is this?” “One moment,” I said. “We have missed this.” We did not find the bill ourselves. The prosecutor’s office, yes, just as it collects evidence against, must also describe and write the favorable evidence. This information reached the court. The court does not feel the need to ask, but I think it is important. Let it be asked. Is it from the phone, automatic? Because “automatic” is said. The basis for that is: “It is understood that one of the two payments was automatic,” it was said. The basis for that is: “At that hour, internet wire transfer appears. The internet flow, even if it is not the same second, may have registered with delay.” Let it be asked. Someone else might have done it too, but this is a subject that must be asked and investigated. A very important subject.
The Pedometer Matter and Cellular Reception Problems in the Village
The pedometer matter, again, look, is not something we found. The man creates a record in his own mind, but does not know these things. He is going toward aggravated life imprisonment, and he does not think of it. Again, we did not find this. A visually-impaired fellow-countryman from Diyarbakır, Müslüm, somehow reached us. He said, “When I went out of the house in the morning I forgot my phone at home. I had just gone out to buy bread. I came back, returned.” This matter was always on his mind. “I thought,” he said, “what if one of the people there has a pedometer?” You said a great thing. Since the mother and Enes are already at home, their pedometers would not reveal anything, but Salim says he was at home that day. According to the narrowed base station he is constantly moving around. A clear piece of data. Either he is lying or he is telling the truth. It will bring it out. Again, this is not something we thought of ourselves, saying “let us find it, let us do it.” Look, people are truly thinking, questioning. There are pieces that do not fit. Let us all question; we possess reason. At the previous session I said, a garment was tailored, sewn. The garment incident — it happens, it does not — the garment does not fit the house; let us look for another size, perhaps it is there. We did not look, but look, we said some things on the first day. By the way, Presiding Judge, has the reply come? — regarding the mobile base stations it has not come. Now, in the narrowed base station, yes, that village is close to the center of Diyarbakır, but there are a few things we can understand from the report, and again from the statements, and from the HTS records. For example, the mosque area. We ourselves went there too. It is still there, we can go. The village is here; around the mosque, there is no reception. When we were at Arif’s house, standing at the wall of Arif’s house, we looked at the location on Google. It was showing us inside Salim’s house. I also asked Google — I asked the IT expert, “How does Google locate?” He said it does triangulation. It does nothing else. What it does is also triangulation. That is, triangulation — look, when we were right in front of the door of Arif’s house, it showed us inside Salim’s house. There was only a single bar of reception; there is a screenshot. If you wish, we can submit it. I will submit that, along with this, in a moment. A single bar of reception. So it is not “close to the center, pulls an incredible signal.” The entire press is here. They all know. In the first days they could not broadcast live there. Those who still go to broadcast know. Serious problems in live broadcasting there, because reception is bad. When the incident happened, the entire press was there. Those who did live broadcasts know. Let them please come as witnesses and say. There are also a few frames of mobile base stations. Now, if I say “there are frames,” you will say, rightly, “what is the date?” We also said, let us write to the BTK. Thank you, you accepted it. The reply still has not come, but we are going to a decision. Now, how healthy is it for you to come and make a measurement in a place where there is a mobile base station? With what did he do “Measurement 2”? This man came and did it with his own phone. He made the measurement with a semi-amateur program he downloaded to his own phone. I too downloaded that program to this phone after this file. A program called NetMonitor.
Semi-Amateur Measurement Program and Data Reliability
An open application. You enter, you look. A semi-amateur program. Think of it like this: for example, sometimes when you go to a place in Google Maps or Yandex Navigation, a road has just opened and data has not been entered there. This too is like that — it does not give instantaneous information. It holds the records that come over time and shares them, because it is an amateur program. Not what he presents; the screenshot he presents is his. On the third page, the white picture on which the maps are shown — that belongs to that app. The other is a different app. As I said, that is not instantaneous. There are recorded ones. “Here, there are these base stations, these base stations give signal at this strength, this region is recorded.” How reliable is this? That is why I say it is unreliable, clearly. Again, mobile base stations — he has taken a precaution of his own. He knew what we would come with. He probably guessed. “I turned off the phone of the personnel present there so as not to affect the signal strength.” How many personnel’s phones can you turn off? On the day in question, 1,700 personnel stood there. They all had to get a signal from the same base station.
The Data-Storing Capacity of Base Stations and Their Unreliability
Base stations are like this: “I am here. Right now there is a base station near the office, probably, I am connected to it. I am connected to that base station.” A base station has a capacity. Every base station is that way. They have “eyes.” There is a capacity; when the capacity is full, the base stations also connect to each other in a honeycomb system. They also know each other. They are in line. When the capacity is full, it transfers you to the second base station to which it has a connection, to which it can pass you. Even if your location does not change — this is important — you are connected to this base station; the capacity filled; you have to connect to a base station again. A communication — internet or call — connects you to the most suitable, nearest base station in the honeycomb system. So they transfer each other there. You did not move. That is, you did not change your location. Here — the things they do with base stations “as if it went from here to there” — this is not real. This data is not reliable data. A colleague said, “Base stations hold something, they hold data.” Base stations cannot hold any data. By law they cannot. They also do not have a place sufficient for it. They do not have storage space. Yesterday Mr. Mahir explained this. These — this is a stunning, dreadful knowledge. There is no data to hold this. Say they do hold it. Let us assume they hold it. I say it is not possible. The expert does not say such a thing either. He does not say such a thing in his report. We claimed something the expert did not say. Well, where is this data? The man says, “I went, I made over 100 calls there.” What is “over 100 calls”? Does a scientific report go like this? “I made 101 calls, I made 187 calls, I made 327 calls.” What is “over 100 calls”? Does a scientific report go like this? Think about it — in such a delicate file, where we will say “black or white” regarding people’s lives, aggravated life or acquittal — what kind of daring is this? Yes, as to essence, perhaps the signature issue will not change the essence, but this is something that will show the daring of these people. If this man has the courage within himself, in a file the whole of Turkey is following, to sign in another’s place, he can also very easily lie, I would say. I said “let him come and tell what he told.” He did not come. If he had, we would have told him to his face; it did not happen. Yes, and now the 22-base matter. 22 base stations…
The 22-Base-Station Matter and Phone Signals
Now the 22-base-station matter. Yes, as I explained, because of the honeycomb system some base stations exist as extra sub-base stations. The narrow-angle — the gendarmerie’s narrow-angle work is there. There 13 base stations were given, and this report says 22. Now people understood this: as if a phone, at the same moment, received signal from 22 base stations and triangulation was done from there. There is no such thing. It is not possible. This phone gets its signal from one base station. I showed it. That app — try one. It is a single base station in the program. I am saying, NetMonitor is an open program. Look, it writes at the bottom — the other base stations, for instance, that it can see, writes the recorded data of their signals, but the one it is connected to is only one. It does not connect a phone to another base station. This is not possible.
The Unreliability of HTS Data and the Construction of the Indictment
Also — look, a striking example of how unreliable HTS data is. I started a call in Diyarbakır. I got into the car, started, set off. I am going to Çınar. I talked on the phone for 40 minutes. My battery ran out. At exactly that 22nd minute, for example, a murder occurs in Diyarbakır. The HTS records come; I appear to be in Diyarbakır, but in fact I am not in Diyarbakır. In the HTS records none of those intermediate transition base stations appear. Whatever base station you first connected to — that one appears. What comes is only that. So this data is this kind of data. Also — I have not seen this in another file, but Mr. Levent said, “We sometimes, in files, when we request the HTS records at different times, get different data, because these are digital data.” Unfortunately, it must be questioned when they are held. Also, they are data coming from the company. They are computer data. Tampering with these is unfortunately possible. Not through intervention, but perhaps with a computer error or something else. An indictment was built on such unhealthy material. Now, well, in the construction of this indictment too, how shall we interpret it? Now, according to the opinion — because it still stands — my prosecutor, has your opinion at the hearing changed? Are the phones open or closed? Our client’s elder brother — you read the part of your opinion in the hearing; it is in the written opinion.
The Contradiction of Whether the Phones Were Open or Closed
OK, alright. If it stands in the written opinion, it stands. Now, if at the time of the incident the mother’s and elder brother’s phones were closed? The expert did not say such a thing. The expert gives a single time. The expert does not know this. How he determined it, I do not know. He probably says they were closed at the root. He did not touch anything, but according to a delivery record he did not sign, he said he received the file. On the 3rd — our colleague explained — according to the delivery record on the 3rd he received the file, but he himself says “I did not touch any document.” Enes says, “In fact, after 06 my phone’s battery ran out” — and indeed after 06:13 there is nothing. No data input. “I do not know which base station we received; the phones shut off,” he says. At which hour the murder might have been committed — for the mother, between 14:28 and 15:38; for Enes, something between 12:41 and 13:41. That too is about 50 minutes. If the phones are closed, how are we to understand she was at home? This is the first question — and the phones are not closed. Look, the phones. The report says the phone is open. At home it continues to receive signal. That means it is open. If we are going to base it on the report — but the opinion and the indictment say so to increase suspicion. Look, truly, when the indictment was drafted, we too were: “How can this be?” Everyone asks. We went, her phone was definitely not closed. Did your battery run out? No. The children? No, the children were playing games. Indeed the investigating prosecutor too: “The children are at home.” When we asked “How can this be?” he says “the children are at home playing games.” If the children are playing games at home, how can the phone be closed? The phone being closed does yes create a suspicious situation, but there is no data on this. No data.
The Absence of a GPS Signal and the “Phone Was Closed” Claim
The absence of a GPS signal alone does not mean the phone was closed, because — look — in the evening hours, in sleep mode — at the previous session I showed, I will show again. For example, for Ms. Yüksel, on the 20th, between 02:01:33 and 03:31:33 there is zero interruption. Again we are talking about a 70-minute interruption. Even more. Over 70 minutes. An 80-minute interruption. Again, here, looking at the interruption in the daytime hours, 14:28–15:38. I said to the friend who understands this: we are speaking, we explained at the first session — what is this, why is it so?
Sleep-Mode Behavior of Phone Signals
He said, “If the phone has no signal business, the base station puts itself in sleep mode for that phone, because that phone’s business with me stands there, but it has no business with me. It does not send a signal, does not receive data, does not send data.” But I said “zero.” He said, “Look, it sent a signal.” It is that — there is a sort of coding, of that. 60 minutes, 70 minutes — it changes accordingly. Sometimes there is even one of two hours. It sends a reminder signal. That is: a phone — is that one still here? — in a thing, with no data sending/receiving at all, zero. If you notice, something with zero sends a signal; the base station looks to see whether the phone is there or not. If we stand up and interpret this as “the phone was closed” to increase suspicion, this is an addition. This is addition. It is not possible to accept this. On this subject, the Diyarbakır Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office has no expertise, we have no expertise, nor does the prosecutor who prepared the opinion have expertise. This requires expertise. If we say the phone is closed, we must have data on this. There must be an expert report, a specialist’s report. We must put this forward. “The phone is closed” — yes, we must say that. The phones are not closed. Look, he himself says so. If those who prepared the report understand this subject, the other thing they say — only — is that the phone is not closed; only at 18:13 “Enes’s phone was closed or turned off near the school.” Enes already says “after 6 my battery was about to run out, it was running out.” It probably did; that is most likely it.
The Fire Matter and Additions That Increase Suspicion
Likewise, Enes’s phone is not closed at the hours of the incident — that is, small things, stones laid as stones leading to hell, are paved in front of these people. For example, what is the fire matter? I want to show a video about this. As you know, a fire started in Diyarbakır in June. It did not stop until Çınar. TEDAŞ said, “It is not from us. A stubble fire.” The Metropolitan Municipality’s fire-brigade report. The Diyarbakır Bar also followed the subject. Because 16 of our people died. A great many animals were lost. The Metropolitan Municipality kept a record. It was said “this is a fire stemming from the power lines.” Indeed, footage of this came out later. A fire starts from the power lines in the summer months again. So here, things that increase suspicion are added. What does he say?
The Cause of the Fire and the Power-Lines Claim
“In the summer month, in a wind-free weather, a fire broke out,” he says. In a moment — there are 1-2 videos — a single wire, no wires at all. There is even a video showing a fire breaking out on a single wire due to overload. So it is not necessary that the wires hit each other for a fire to break out. This region has seen other fires after that date too. It saw one in Yukarı Nasırlı Mahallesi. Likewise, in Tavşantepe, 1-2 years ago, in the Gürans’ — the uncle’s — field again, a fire due to power lines was seen. Indeed the damage for this was paid. Because it was determined it was from the power lines, TEDAŞ paid for the damage. So it is not the case that this fire never broke out, is not breaking out. Besides, who would benefit from this fire? The most important thing is that this fire breaks out at late hours, after 22:00. We know from the DARAN-360 camera footage that came late — 23 — look, we looked there; “maybe we see something” — exactly at the moment the fire broke out the camera also went off. “Perhaps,” I said, “we will see the poles and so on, the wires hitting” — it did not happen. Because at that moment the camera also goes off. If it is opened, you will see an image from there shortly.
Finding of the Slipper and the Early Suspicion of the Family
The slipper incident was told — now everywhere, from everywhere, every piece of evidence was collected; into this file a sack was found and taken, a garment was found and taken, another slipper was found and taken — that is, what the gendarmerie itself found. Someone was going to find the slipper. Someone was going to find it. The one who found it — why is it that it was Mr. Arif’s nephew, his sister’s son? “How can you find it?” Someone was going to find the slipper. Did the gendarmerie not see it, or could that child not have found the slipper a minute before the one who dropped it? The slipper looks alike; a slipper looking exactly alike. “You saw the slipper — you did something suspicious”; they take the child as a suspect. Look — the second day. They say “the family misdirected us”; but you already saw the family as suspects on the second day. “A death incident,” they said. To the child, they said: Muhammed said it here. “Murderer, what did you do to the child? Tell quickly.” You have already looked at the incident this way. You have said “it could be a suspect.” You have also kept a record of it. Now “they misdirected me” — I asked the press, “Who told you this potato-line matter?”
The “Potato-Line” Allegation and the False Tip-Offs
The press said, “The gendarmerie says it.” Goodness gracious — is there anything like “potato line” in the file? There is nothing like “potato line” in the file. In the file there are false tip-offs. The greatest part of these tip-offs came to the family. To Mr. Arif, for example. Someone messaged. “I am Narin.” Think of what merciless people there are. What a merciless society we live in. We have seen this before. We saw it in the earthquake file too. The man — “I am under the rubble” — sending messages to AFAD, I do not remember whether it was women or children. We also saw those tyrants sending messages left and right saying “I am under the rubble.” Yes, we are a cruel society. There are those who call saying “We have the girl.” Those who call and make a child’s voice. That is, people thought it had passed very comfortably; as if they did not care. They did nothing — you saw the interrogation of the shepherd. Look, the Diyarbakır Bar — as I said — did many things worthy of respect here. Again I say, they also knew the translation there was wrong. They did not ask any questions about it, because the National Criminal Bureau was only after its own PR. I said, when you sent it there, “I wish you had not sent it there” and immediately sent an objection petition. Our reason was: in open view, directly in contact with persons openly issuing heavy insults against the family on social media, with persons openly declaring war. How am I to trust your impartiality?
The Partiality of the National Criminal Bureau and Cyber-Attack Allegations
You are not impartial, you are a party. He fabricates, for example. What does he fabricate? 46 cyber attacks. These men do not even know how to use a computer properly. Who is going to cyber-attack you? The first thing — “from the potato lines — perhaps they are also threatening us through those lines.” If you have a threat, go and file a complaint. Go and file a complaint, do not stand. Let it be identified. Let him get the heaviest punishment. For example, we have seen such things in this file too. We saw Twitter prosecutions. Chat rooms set up; one enters; it is clear they arranged among themselves, agreed. It is evident. “I, I do not know, Ahmet Güran.” He starts cursing those there, “I will kill you all with guns, I don’t know what.” “Look, the Gürans came, threatened us.” Let it be identified — who is it? 90% he is someone hand-in-glove with you; you do a stage play. This — then the public too — “how are these? even here, even there they are sitting. They sit right next to me.” Something happens: “There is no peace from these” — he tweets. Peace, yeah.
The Fire Footage and the Rejection of the External-Intervention Allegation
As to the topic, the other subject I was passing — electricity, yes, look at this. As you see, it is not a place where external intervention could occur. A fire breaks out. Like this, again, look here; there, yes, again in a windless weather. The cables have not touched each other. A fire breaks out. There are tens, thousands of such things. We also in Diyarbakır, when we were children, encountered these all the time. We always saw them. Most probably in many parts of Turkey people have encountered them. Look, again a single wire. Just one — no chance of striking another wire now. Probably no wind either — how is it “throwing”? As if an expert had come and taken a report saying this never happened, an expert. Or had filmed it — a very simple question I will ask. Since the gendarmerie was there, intervened, Presiding Judge, why were these plastic sticks they call “rods” not confiscated? Why are there no photographs? Why are these not in the file?
The Non-Collection of Fire-Intervention Evidence and Fuat Güran’s Situation
The gendarmerie was there. The person in charge also took them — where are these plastic sticks? Kurtuluş told me, “When the fire fell to the ground, I broke off a bush,” he says. “I was trying to put out the fire on the ground.” Is he not to try to put out a fire breaking out in his own garden, in his elder brother’s garden? They said, “There was a blanket.” Look — this is also about the fire in Diyarbakır. Yes, this too is about the fire in Diyarbakır. He said, “I was trying to put out the fire there. A stick, a bush; I broke off a bush, I hit with it.” That bush is not enough for that. The only one with a stick in his hand — “Who has a stick?” I asked. He said, “I broke off a bush.” Someone else might have broken one off too; “we were beating it with green bushes to put out the fire.” That is the fire matter. On this, there is no document kept by someone with expertise. There is no paperwork. To come here and say “yes, it happened with external intervention” or “there is something else here” — at the simplest, all the gendarmerie personnel are inside the village. There are not 3-5 but hundreds of gendarmerie personnel already. They are right there. They are immediately there. They also intervened in the fire. Since you intervened — they had plastic sticks in their hands — there is damage to state property or to private property, there is an offense, there are offense elements. Where are these plastic sticks? Where are their papers? Where is the record? Why are there no images of this? Because “Let it happen so that it is on file. Let it stand so that I can use it later against the family.” Just as with Fuat Güran being in detention in this file. During a house search — their own house search — the family knows, they still say, it does not pass that way in the records. It is not while distributing tea; perhaps during the house search he brought tea, I do not know. Pardon — that may be so too. Perhaps it is as they say. He said, “He listened to us during the house search.” Imagine a person; his nephew is missing. Do not think of a conspiracy. Think of yourself. Just think of “a missing nephew.” The police and gendarmerie have come; they are working there. What do you do? You look to their mouths. “Will they say something? Is there information, news?” We also look to the doctor’s mouth in a hospital; to see something abnormal here is really a malicious reading. What can the man listen to during a search? What could they be talking about during the search? The occupants are present at the search — the occupants, by the way, are his nephews. That is, they are going to talk in front of him anyway, and he will hear.
The Hostages File and the Confidentiality Order
In this file there are “hostages.” Truly, the other file is the hostages file. Why is it not given to us? Mr. Nahit said, “I saw all the documents.” Why can we not see them? This file continues in destruction of evidence of the offense. By law, the file is open. We all know. How can there still be a confidentiality order? We make requests; “I will not take action,” he says. Look, there are very important matters. We say, for example, the things that will truly clarify this file — yes, we are now defense counsel, but actually we are defending people who have lost their children or siblings. They truly want everyone who has a hand in this offense to come out. Yesterday I said one or two things. Maybe it was not understood, maybe it will not be understood, because I am going to criticize you here too. We are going at the speed of light. I hope our end is safety, because we needed to touch all the evidence. Look, at the first hearing there were no HTS. Vecdin Bahtiyar came; I had questions to ask him, but I could not. There were none, because — you know, Presiding Judge — on the 8th, Nevzat Bahtiyar goes to Tavşantepe. He leaves Çarıklı, goes to Tavşantepe. There are witnesses to this. His son’s friend, Murat Tutulmaz, and again the clients of ours, Enes’s step-grandmother Süheyla Özkan, invited them to their home. Upstairs there is a big tumult. Everyone is in a miserable state. No one is in a position to cook either. Murat also came for that — he is friends both with İbrahim and with Baran. He came for that. İbrahim too hears; they go with Nevzat’s son to dinner. Nevzat Bahtiyar, Nevzat’s wife are there; they are eating at home. The food at home, for example, was stuffed meatballs. Why did we mention stuffed meatballs? The boy remembers. If only we had heard him as a witness. It would have been in a few videos; but then there are Nevzat Bahtiyar’s statements.
Nevzat Bahtiyar’s Gendarmerie Statement and the Role of the Personnel
Now Nevzat Bahtiyar’s statement is in the file. Thankfully there is a video. Thankfully there is a video. I wish all statements of all suspects or defendants had been on video like this. It clearly shows how badly the gendarmerie takes a statement. Now, is it Nevzat Bahtiyar’s statement, or the statement of the one taking the statement? Here it is not direction; direction occurs within certain areas. This is something beyond direction. The man has sentences he never formed, sentences that do not appear in his statement, written as if in Nevzat’s statement. Now when we read Nevzat Bahtiyar’s gendarmerie/law-enforcement statement, it has his signature at the bottom. There is a lawyer. Fine — we would say “this is Nevzat’s statement” if there were no video, but there is video. We see that this is not Nevzat’s statement. What does it say for example? About the call — “Why did you call at 15:08?” he says. “I called about the water matter.” “Well,” he says, “are you regretful?” — he asks something like that. There it does not pass; he says “who called.” Sorry — the gendarmerie personnel adds this: “I wish I had not called, I would not have been in this, I am regretful.” No such expression, no such statement comes out of the man’s mouth. Let us also look at what he says about the confession of the incident. The man is, as it were — there must be a translation from Turkish to Turkish — the man says something; the gendarmerie personnel, as if “Nevzat probably meant this,” translates. Because we do not understand. We hear it like that. When we hear what he says, words and expressions that do not come out of his mouth, or things about the way he expresses it that are not there — “I am regretful; when the gendarmerie comes I know they will take me.” He does not say at once “I confessed right away.” At the outset he says “I did not tell.” “They took me somewhere, there I told.” That is, so it is in the video; but he says “when the gendarmerie came, I also confessed this incident.” This is how it passed into the statement. In false tip-offs you clearly see the direction. In this way, in how many places, there are how many directions toward Salim Güran. Direction — as I said, I pass that — the statement has ceased to be Nevzat Bahtiyar’s statement, because most of the words there do not belong to him. They belong to the person taking the statement. That is, we can call them the statements of the person taking the statement. The personnel has his signature at the bottom as “the one taking the statement.” Actually, the one giving the statement himself — it is not Nevzat’s statement.
False Tip-Offs and Their Effect on the Family
That man says, “Were there false tip-offs?” “Yes, there were,” he says. “They came from TikTok.” He was going to attribute it to that — “we could not find her because false tip-offs were coming.” “Was the family doing this?” he asks. “No,” he says, “they were coming to the family.” “False tip-offs came from TikTok,” he says. “False tip-offs were coming to the family.” For example, he says, “She is here; the family was going there, they could not find her there.” So at least the family told this, because in the searches — he is there too — tip-offs were coming to the family from everywhere. As I said, not only Mr. Arif. Mr. Arif, after a certain point, put his phone aside. So many things were said about him too. There is the Furkan-real-estate matter, as you know. It was discussed in the first days. Supposedly the girl’s disappearance time was mentioned earlier. Later it was understood it was taken via the USA — the post. For that reason the time difference is misinterpreted. The friends actually prepared about this. They will talk only about the false news. Regarding the false news that came out, tip-offs came to the family constantly — not to one person but to all members of the family. “Look, we saw someone here; it may be connected with that.” But they do this — perhaps they are also making a mistake — they go to the gendarmerie and say “Such a thing came, for your information.” We go there; for the first few, the gendarmerie goes with them; then the gendarmerie does not go anymore. “Go look,” it says. “If there is something, we will come.” So here, to people who are attacking left and right, calling like crazy, they later say “you are wasting our time.” What can they do? When a person does not know, the things he does will unfortunately not be on the side that obtains results. Like in that — like in the faith-healer matter.
The Faith-Healer Matter and the Role of the Gendarmerie
Yes, it was visited; there is a record. Was only one faith-healer visited? There is also a faith-healer brought by the gendarmerie. We cannot tell it now because there is no record of it. If there had been a record of this too, if we had also recounted this, they would not have believed us. What century are we living in? The gendarmerie takes them; in fact it abuses the family. Using religious feelings, it is abuse. Was any action taken? We do not know. If it was taken, they are the victims. Their statements too must be taken. They go to a faith-healer; Mr. Salim explained, in full detail. The faith-healer gives an address; while searching the address, the gendarmerie personnel is there too. Ready, he is chanting, saying something, asking the child something. The little child — whether he is having a hallucination or whatever is happening — says something in his own mind, or because it is a place he passed by, it is imprinted somewhere in his brain, he tells and tells. Mr. Salim also, seeing so much detail, says “All right, we have found her probably.” Yesterday he explained, he said he was happy. With Erhan, “she may be alive perhaps,” he goes. I am speaking according to the record. “I said to the gendarmerie, let us go here. We will definitely find her. Look, muhtar, we will go here; if it turns out empty, it is no good. I will get reprimanded by my superiors.” That is how it is in the military. You went, told, it did not happen, you will be reprimanded. “Are you sure?” “I am sure,” he says. “We will obtain a result from here.” Well, now you know the source of the information. A source of information you know, you went together, the faith-healer said. Afterwards, there will be a raid, a house search will be carried out. No one has a complaint. No one has any complaint because the situation is explained, “it is for Narin.” The family whose house is searched also says “If it is for Narin, so be it.” They never complain. He was a manager working at DİSKİ, whatever — “but the family misdirected us, in an organized manner.” Also — I am very curious what kind of thing “organized” is. This expression, yes, exists in the TCK, but what organization did we see here? Among those who gave statements, Ramazan Atasoy does not even remember the day the electrician came. There are footage — I was going to show it, the Diyarbakır Bar showed it. There is no need anymore. We too identified that camera. We found many things from there. We were also going to tell. Salim’s second going and electricity coming. We were looking at everything from there too.
The Neglect of the Importance of the Camera Recordings
Ruhi Tekin’s camera — the cameras — were important constantly; but the prosecutor’s office that drafted the indictment says the camera is not important at all. “You have no business with these cameras.” You did not send them, thank you. You insisted, we requested. You also, insistently, on the third day of the hearing you held, some of the footage came. “You have no business with these cameras.” In such a file, if the cameras had not existed, would Nevzat Bahtiyar have come out? He would never have come out. No one would have found him. He has committed a flawless murder from his own standpoint. The only thing he did not account for was the cameras.
Nevzat Bahtiyar’s Role and Character in the Adjudication
If that farm camera had not existed, today he would never have been one of those being tried. No one was suspicious of him. At the previous session I said, “A ghost” — but this session he came aggressively. An aggressive stance. He offered us eggplants and such. Let us see what else he will say. To our other lawyer-colleague, “I am not a parrot, I do not know what.” Actually he showed how angry he can get and how he can express it outwardly. Everyone tells — even he said, “I am a poor man.” Is this what poor-manhood looks like? You do not accept a 10,000-lira discount, 10,000 liras. That man says, he states, but Salim says a higher figure. He is talking about 160-170 thousand. He says 10,000, 150,000, 140,000. I do not think he is telling the truth, because he is not telling the truth about anything. I do not think he has told the truth to this day. If Salim can put such pressure on you that when he says “Take this child, bury her,” you do it — will he not be able to have you plaster a house for him? Were you not his man?
The Deterioration of the Relationship Between Salim and Nevzat
There are very critical things by which we can understand the relationship deteriorated. What are they? Mr. Onur mentioned — the intensity of phone calls is very important. In April and May there are 47 calls. Not mutual messaging, only calls. Yes, it is clear they spoke well until the 21st. Not until that, until May 21. It is clear the incident happened on that date. Because the car matter they gave had become a dispute; in our part it is like that — if a dispute occurred, if the community was seated, if an environment was set up here, if people, elders, were called — the meaning of this is: “If we do not reach a reconciliation here, we have reached the stage where we will harm each other.” Indeed Mr. Arif forgot to tell — probably he told us. “Baran said, ‘Shall I beat this one? This man is shouting, calling out like that, etc.’” “Son, we are not here for a fight, we are here to talk. And if you beat this man, he will not pay our money. I say ‘this man is in the wrong, I will get this money from him’; that is all.” Actually it is heated; but now the heat of a man who has lost his child cannot be expected to tell this, of course. That is why even when he talks about Eren, or what he lost — let me not say — I see his state, because I talked with him a lot.
Details of the Relationship Between Salim and Nevzat
Because of that money matter, afterwards his dialogue was broken. That is, Salim has not called at all. He said a word: “Salim, I chased him off, that is, I said ‘go.’” There is a term in slang, “just like that,” he says. “On the phone I said so, our dialogue was cut,” he used to say. Salim never called. Nevzat called four times. June, July, twice in August. And the last call on that unfortunate day. A possibility: perhaps no one in that village had a good dialogue with Nevzat. One of the leading figures of the village was Salim. The only thing he gave him — we too considered this, not that we did not. His only friend — that is, the only one who valued him, a person at a respectable place in society — was going with him somewhere. “I was taking him to dinners, he was beside me.” Mr. Arif tells me, “I never valued him.” Mr. Erhan also says so. “I would never speak, would never like him. His morals were not nice, we did not like him. He was close with Salim.” If there is an organization, if there is a direction toward Nevzat, if everyone is this way, why does not everyone say in their statements “that man is foul, that man is such, that man does not like us”? Everyone says “he and Salim got along well.” Actually everyone has told what they really knew. The family arranged this so. How did they arrange it? They did not hire lawyers, for example. “Let everyone tell what they know.” They trusted the state very much; they said, “The state, within these boundaries — if it is not rights and law, certainly it is — will conduct this investigation correctly and bring the truth out.” But the people, to cover their own faults, displayed other behaviors. There is no call in this file. Say he did call that day. Again he did not see the warmth he wanted, because two feasts had passed in between. He called again; again he did not see the warmth he wanted. Who is the reason for this? Arif probably went out with that anger — look, in his statement we asked that day, we asked today.
The Place Where Nevzat Was Watering and the Possibility of Seeing Narin
Insistently, when he goes out to water, he does not say that he came to the front side. He knows; he is an intelligent man. Fatih said — true, he is intelligent. The place where he will take the hose, the place he will turn on the tap, is on the front side. That is, he says he was watering where Narin passed. He has forgotten something. If you watered, you had to go to where the tap is. You had to turn on the tap. The tap is on Narin’s route. If you talked at 15:08 and you went out, there is no possibility that you did not see Narin. Whatever happened, happened there.
The Claim That Nevzat’s Act Was Sudden or Planned
Either he made a sudden decision, or impulsive — there was something he had planned earlier — because the mother, after learning it was Nevzat, said, “Nevzat had given money to my daughter.” We could have brought witnesses about this, we did not. We truly wanted this trial to proceed fluidly. The last, the last two cousins seen with her are Hatice and Fatma. That is what the family said. Beyaz TV too — they — we were there — “He came and gave money to his own grandchild and to Narin, but did not give us money.” This could be it: his son’s friend Baran. Perhaps he gave it to their daughter saying “maybe our relations can improve a bit.” Perhaps there was something else underneath, we do not know. Unfortunately — we told you — some of our questions were lost in the noise. If we had asked this, he would have said it. But Mr. Yılmaz, for example, asked, “When you bought something for your grandchild, something like chips, would you also buy it for her?” “Yes,” he said, “I would.” Did he do this with this intent? As I said, I do not know if with another intent. Only he himself can explain. The reason this file has become complicated is him. He does not explain anything. Constantly new lies. Look, why can we not give credit to his statements? For us to credit a person’s statements, there must be evidence, indications, traces that support the statements.
The Refutation of Nevzat’s Statements and the DNA Link
The man says something; then we look — a lie. He is lying with concrete evidence. “She did not come”; we say Salim’s vehicle has no movement. Like that — he did not come and take that blanket; at least this was established. Stand up and say “I did not take the blanket, there is no blanket.” Then change and say something else, produce something else. No — he has to continue the same lie, because he has to connect it with DNA. Otherwise how is he to set up the DNA in Salim’s car, load the death onto him, and present himself only as responsible for nothing more than destruction of evidence? So he has such a fiction. It is not possible — not for reason, that is. Look, we already know what “imputation of crime” is. There are many jurists here, no need to explain. His statements must be supported. His statements are constantly refuted. It was an important thing; I said it was half-left. Let me return there. On the 8th Nevzat is working in Çarıklı; in the evening he comes home. When he came home in the evening, the food at their house was stuffed meatballs. There are witnesses to this.
Vecdin Bahtiyar’s Suspicious Movements and Phone Calls
If only we had heard them, because we think those who know this incident — maybe they are not in it, but we think there are those who helped him in hiding, destroying evidence of the offense. We even have more bold things, but because we cannot prove them we cannot say them. He comes to Tavşantepe, eats, sits. There are those at the same table. Around 8 p.m. Vecdin calls him. It is in the HTS records. Vecdin was with him all day that day. Here too he said, “We were at the coffeehouse; I actually could not go to Tavşantepe.” At first he said that; later he says, “We were at the coffeehouse, we sat in Çarıklı together.” What are you going to talk about for three minutes with the man you sat with in Çarıklı? Again he is lying. He may lie, that is his right, his right of defense, but look, Vecdin has very suspicious movements. The gendarmerie also partly realized, could not solve. Vecdin may perhaps not be a bridge with Salim. “Does this side know something? If so, what order will he give Nevzat to escape?” He will say “run, these will kill you, understand.” I read it that way too. I read it that way too. Also, the gendarmerie says “sequential calls.” I read it the same way too.
The Possibility That Vecdin Leaked Information
Vecdin is calling Salim until the body is found. He gets information; after he gets information, he gives information to Nevzat. “Do not be afraid,” he says. “There is nothing, they have not understood you. You go too, maybe join the searches,” he says. I read it that way. Vecdin goes to Hatay to work. Stays 5 or 6 days. Stays 5 days, I think. “Go to Hatay, to a TOKİ job, work only five days” — this is not possible within the ordinary course of life. Information goes to him, information goes. I think so, I read it so. Otherwise, if only they had come, we would have interrogated. For example, “Why do you say you did not come to Tavşantepe that day, but you did come to Tavşantepe, and what happened that day?” You are a villager; no one can tell you “do not come” because even his relatives from the city have gone, they have not taken them in, have not taken them in to Mr. Arif’s house. There is a corridor there; they are not taking family members, but those relatives who want to go to Tavşantepe are going — relatives who reside in Diyarbakır are going. He himself went but says, “They did not let me in, for security reasons.” He is lying, because there are witnesses. If only we had heard them. Something will come from there too. Vecdin first makes a short, then a long call, as I said — nearly three minutes.
The Finding of the Body and Vecdin’s Role
Probably, he says — this is now my guess — even the one who made the report may be Vecdin, because the family tells us: “On the 7th, in the evening, the entire gendarmerie and everything was withdrawn. Look — no one in the village.” In the morning, all the press knows this; AFAD is taken out from the area where the search will be done; search-and-rescue is taken out from that area; they say “go to the other side.” The others are also taken out; the gendarmerie alone starts the search in that area and, in a short time, she is found. What a coincidence — look at our starring role, Vecdin: in the morning at 06:34, between Vecdin and Nevzat communication begins again. Shall we call all these a coincidence? We do not say so, but we could not hear them at the outset. There was no HTS. Because of that we could not ask. Look, he is listening with full attention. He who listens carelessly to none of it listens to these places carefully, because he knows there is a grain of truth. These were in contact. We are speaking on the basis of real documents. That evening, information about his being caught probably came to him too. In the barn — if that area had also been searched, whether the barn, or the other side, or somewhere in the place Narin was last seen — searches were conducted everywhere with blue light. They looked at the stones; “there is blood here; this blood is this; other places were looked at.” If only they had also been done there, because the place she was last seen — I said in the hearing too — there is a record kept on the 2nd. The term “ghost” comes from there. The place where Narin Güran was last seen has now been confirmed. According to the school camera, that is it; let us take Maide’s statement. Let us say the one who saw her last is she; she says she saw her at a similar place.
The Place Narin Was Last Seen and the Concealment of Nevzat’s House
The closest place, indisputably, is Nevzat Bahtiyar’s house and barn. The record goes like this: “Near the place Narin was last seen, outside of the immediate family there was no one whose house was nearby; only the uncle Salim Güran, the great uncle Hüseyin Güran, and Fuat Güran’s house — no house other than these three was present” — a record was kept for this reason. The closest house is Nevzat’s. Why is it not in the record? Fuat’s house is 400 meters away. Hüseyin Güran’s house is 250-300 meters away. The father Arif Güran’s house is more than 100 meters away. Nevzat’s house, however, is not 20 meters. Why is it not in the record? “Why did you not mention this man?” they say. No one noticed. The man, as I said, is like a ghost. He comes, takes the front in searches, is on the ground, sits, consoles the father.
Nevzat’s Information-Gathering Efforts and the Importance of the Village Cameras
So he is under every stone in everything, because he has to get information and, since he may not be able to analyze the information alone, he transfers it to his brother, whose mind he trusts. He analyzes with his brother. From the outset the statements, with a protective instinct, are different. When we look at the statements first taken, Gazal immediately has him leave the house. “He left the house immediately,” she says. “He spoke, then went down by car, etc.” We also thought about this, could not find it: did he perhaps leave the village earlier? Those cameras were important for this too.
The Failure to Examine the Village-Entry Cameras
Mr. Nahit said, “The camera does not see the village; it does not see the village, so is there such a thing as ‘not taken’?” It is a kidnapping case; there is a camera — very high-quality, able to make very, very high-quality recordings — that sees all the roads leading to the village. How can this camera not be taken? If this child was abducted from the village, will it not be necessary to look at all the routes? All the routes, that is, even if she was abducted on foot — look, the route of the shepherd, his coming that way, going to the water canal — the camera sees everywhere. The camera sees everywhere. They went to the camera, looked at it. “Yes, there is such a camera,” they said. A minute, or I think a 30-second clip, was taken. “Well, it does not see the village; when it comes to the village it descends into the valley, it does not see, let us not take this,” they said, did not take it.
The Presence of Nevzat’s Son and Mehmet Bahtiyar’s Excuse
When did it come to their minds? When they reached Narin’s lifeless body. Look, this camera is under your hand. Take it! What room will it occupy? You have already taken irrelevant places; yes, the irrelevant seems irrelevant, perhaps it would be relevant. You did well to take them; you should have taken that too. When that man went — was he alone? Our suspicion about him is: perhaps he was not alone, because he feels the need to conceal who was at home. His little son is at home. In my opinion he is concealing; he says “he is not at home.” Sometimes at home, sometimes not at home. He alternates. Now, Mehmet Bahtiyar that day says he was at Pirinçlik all day. At the outset, look at the instinct of the form. He has planned, fictionalized, prepared, but he himself accepted — does not know — because at the outset he probably would not have accepted. Then for some reason, we do not know what happened, he has accepted. We do not know — did he perhaps receive a promise that no one from his family would be touched? A promise? I do not know. We even started to think about these things. Really, we started to think about these things.
The Inconsistency of the Suspect Scope and the Detention Decisions
If you are detaining one person on this side because he made a time error, or detaining someone because he found a slipper — the man is clearly there according to camera recordings, clear from his own statements; the man says “we were at Pirinçlik all day.” Take him too, take him at least as a suspect. Fine, do not detain. Detention is an exceptional institution. We too agree. Let us be libertarian, but this is a suspicious situation — take him as a suspect. Take one statement, Gazal Bahtiyar’s statement, as a suspect. We made a request — perhaps she used his phone, we are saying; we do not know, because on the 28th there is no call at all. No one called this man from outside, he did not call either. What happened that day? We know he went fishing; we know he took his car in for repair. How do we know? His children’s friends are there; for example in the village Baran is his friends there; for example they are talking from there. For example, who is in the village, who is not, is being discussed. “The man went fishing,” he says. God knows why he went! He says he went fishing, but we do not know what happened. He took his car in for repair. Why did he have it repaired? So many dark unknown things about him. I say again, when did this man leave the village? It is not clear. Because the same sacks are also at his house in Çarıklı. The sacks seized there also have serial numbers. Again the same fertilizer things. Where did this man go? Because there is a strangeness, there truly is a strangeness in this situation.
The Illogic of the Narrowed Base Station and the Possibility of a Sudden Event
That is, our hands are tied by this thing: that monster called the narrowed base station. We do not know — by 35, he never entered the barn, but up to 35 — and afterwards, as I said, let us look at it mathematically first. Now he came; at home — how is this to happen with Narin? How is Salim to be informed? We have reason; come, let us calculate. Let us also put the human factor into it. At home, take whichever defendant you like and let us cause Narin’s death through him; then let us fictionalize. Is it possible? Logically, not possible. This can only be suddenly occurring, one person carrying it out and then having to think for a few minutes: “What did I do, how did it happen, how did it happen?” Afterwards, he will make a plan and apply that plan. This fits exactly, fits one-to-one. This timing can only fit this, nothing else, cannot fit. Now, if the family is at its own house first, how did it happen?
The Family’s Behaviors and the Murder-Plan Allegation
She would look to see if she was alive, she would want to take her to the hospital. Without these — that is, it could only be — the plan would have to be like this: it would have to be a plan to kill. If people believe this too, I can say nothing. It would be a plan to kill; as soon as she came, he would kill her immediately; and in that case, why would he need Nevzat? Why would he need a new witness — whose mind does this sit on? This is not possible, not likely. Now, does Nevzat know the village better than Salim? Does he have a car? No. He too has a car. Why would he bring out a new witness? As I said, many things do not confirm his statements. The narrowed base station also does not confirm. Now, the pedometer — in my opinion that was the most important thing. In my eyes, what solved the knot of this case was that; but we did not find it. A visually-impaired brother of ours found it. May Allah bless him. When we took the file we too were suspicious of Salim. If what is said is true, “wait a moment,” I told Mr. Arif. Mr. Arif said, “I trust him. If you are questioning, you know something; question.” I said, “I will also ask him a question. Let us look, what is it?” At the hearing, before the indictment was drafted, we asked, “Why did you delete these calls?” He has a reason of his own, he tells it; you believe, you do not believe. Now the man has come to the center of Diyarbakır, Presiding Judge.
Salim’s Pedometer and Personal Apps
I may step into private life, forgive me. Those in his family know it too; let them know now. There is an app on his phone. When we opened it at the detention facility we saw. Mr. Salim, forgive me — an app called “kaçamak” (affair/escape). So the man has done something of his own. It is his own shame, his own thing. He wanted to cover his own shame. Perhaps the man came to the center of Diyarbakır with his children; perhaps at that time something occurred via WhatsApp or elsewhere. Because before and after Nevzat on the 21st, he deleted those in-between times. Perhaps at that time correspondence, something continued — I think so, but I cannot prove it. If he himself tells, he tells; if he does not tell, I cannot say anything. Yes, there is one left on his phone, but I do not think it is only that one. For example, Mr. Arif was surprised. I shared it with Mr. Arif. I said, “There is such a thing.” He said, “I would expect it from anyone but him. He is very devoted to his home and children.” Fine, it is his own thing, I cannot say anything.
The Excessive Investigation of the Family and Privacy Violations
Such things private to this family were delved into, all the stones were turned over, that — think about it, even a matter of a goose in the village is in the file. It was going to be made a murder motive. It has been reflected in the documents; if you do not know, let me tell you too. A goose was stolen. Even about a goose — a goose stolen months earlier — even this was investigated. Every single thing of them was examined, every single thing. I claim that there is no one — no one — whose everything is examined this way in this region. In every family there is such a “criminal type” or someone who engages in strange, odd affairs. In every family, it comes out. Especially in this region, in the village, in the countryside, there is no one who does not know about illegal electricity. Let them say. There is almost no house without a gun here. If there is no gun — this place is not the only one; in many rural regions of Turkey, unfortunately, it is so. They lived through the 90s. They do not know what came after. Now with force — of course, slowly this is going toward disarmament, thank God — but on the other hand there are unidentifiable things entering from Syria. While it is being prevented, it continues. Punishments are increased for deterrence. How much is sufficient? It can be debated. Everything was examined. Look, as I said, in fact nothing was found, but constantly — for example, on the first day, the complainant side did this: they pressed every button. They even pressed on things that are not in the file.
The Unjust Detention of Ramazan Atasoy and the Violation of Fair Trial
A boy named Ramazan Atasoy was detained in this file. Our bar has a Children’s Rights Commission; it is very valuable. Please, let us do something for that boy too. That boy — look, he said something. When I first saw him at the first hearing, I really felt bad. I learned the boy had survived death. In this file, the only child was not Narin. Many children were victimized. Eren was; Ramazan Atasoy is being. He said, “If I knew something, I would tell whatever I knew to get out of here.” It went into the record, but at that moment there was a commotion. I hope you understood. “If I knew something, I would tell it,” he said; but the boy had confused everything — it is clear he had gone into a coma. His lawyer, if he is here — he told our interpreter Mr. Abdullah; he told me a little. The boy had a traffic accident, survived death. Obviously the child of a poor family. He has to work in the field, at 14 years old. In this incident there is a wrong translation — the gendarmerie’s wrong translation is in the file. Now everyone knows what that is, Presiding Judge knows, the Diyarbakır Bar knows. That is, the Ministry of Family and Social Policies, having seen the file, please take interest, because that boy is unjustly detained. People are afraid. They are afraid of this, look — I was saying earlier, has it remained? — Ersan Şen. You saw — watch, turn it on if you have not seen. He said nothing, actually. He said “presumption of innocence.” He said “attempt to influence a fair trial.” What was not said to the man? “Did you take money from them?” They never met, they did not even come into contact. The man does not already say “they are innocent.” In Turkey, regarding this file, there is hardly anyone left who has not attempted to influence a fair trial. According to everyone, there is a killer per everyone. They say this so boldly, with such — some even assume the role of the court and construct a decision. They construct a decision like: “This statement says this, so this is so,” they are that brave. No action was taken against anyone. Except for one person. Only Arif Güran has attempted to influence a fair trial. Currently a complainant. In his opinion he can tell the killer, I think.
Arif Güran’s Statement and the Discussion of Fair Trial
Fine, “presumption of innocence until anyone’s guilt is proven” — yes, he is a father, his liver has burned; for this reason he can express an opinion. He too justifies this in his own way. He says, “In my opinion, this man is the killer, because the man, determined by footage, did not confess anything; he only had to acknowledge the part determined by the footage. Because he could no longer escape, because of it. Otherwise he has no intention of accepting that either. He still twists everything.” “An investigation” regarding Arif Güran for why he said “Nevzat is the killer.” Come on then, take ownership of your file. Take action against everyone. I say everyone’s tweets, news, posts, utterances are there. Everyone is now on the record. Take action against everyone. They are talking about our file. Take action against everyone. They are talking about our file. Attempt to influence a fair trial — the TCK is clear, they are influencing. Yes, we did not want to enter social media or appear on women’s programs. Even a close friend of mine — if she appeared, maybe I would have mocked her. We were compelled, we had no choice. Because public opinion was designed with wrong information.
The Media’s Perception Management and Malcolm X
Look, Malcolm X has a beautiful saying: “If you let the media, it will show the oppressors to you as good, the oppressed as bad.” In this file, permission was given. Fatih told a beautiful thing yesterday. “Enes is a good kid,” he said. I too read it in a book; I have been thinking for two days. Which book, I cannot remember. It tells the story of a character from waking up until 2 p.m. In the continuation it tells the character again, the same character, but so differently that how you tell an incident is very important. It can make you love the person, or make you hate them. Which aspects you tell, how you tell them, are important. Yes, yesterday he could not express himself well here. He could not. He had a nervous breakdown.
Enes Güran’s Reaction and Its Being Misunderstood
“If,” he said, “they were misunderstood. If,” he said, “my family were in this business, if I had known this, I would not have left this business here. I would have killed all of them and myself.” “But what was understood?” “I would have taken the AK-47, I wish I had killed myself, I had killed him.” He did not say it this way — what he meant was: “I, as you describe, as you claim, among my family, my uncle, my mother — to my sister my uncle is going to cause harm, my mother is going to know, I am also going to be there, I am going to remain silent?” This was his rebellion, but people did not want to understand it this way because the sentences he formed are not your sentences. Yes, people have difficulty expressing themselves, but let us not forget — what pressure they are under. At the end of this business is either aggravated life or acquittal. The discretion, as I said, is the court’s. “Black and white” is Mr. Yılmaz’s phrase, a very beautiful phrase. “Black and white” for people is a black card, a white card. That is, continuing to live or being at the end of life — they are at a turning point. No one in their life has experienced here, has passed through here. This is how it must be viewed. Now, regarding the marks — I told at the previous session. There were one or two matters left incomplete. I want to tell those. This boy is 18 years old. Yesterday we saw an image. We were not able to show it to him; there was no opportunity in prison. We had identified it, took a photograph. “It is mine,” he said. We asked your permission. “Presiding Judge, this,” we said. “May we show this image?” We could not show it at all in prison; there is no opportunity. Himself, or not? Fatih showed it. Yes, it is himself. We became sure — yet even now “It is not him, it is his brother,” they say. He was asked. He says it is himself. The court, if it wishes, can also have an analysis done regarding this, height, whatever, from the camera angle. Is he or not.
Enes’s Searching for His Sister and His Psychological State
He is searching for his sister, cannot find her, slapping his knees. Ultimately, out of exhaustion he falls to the ground. I used a word, “canhıraş” (heart-rending). That is exactly what it shows — that is, he is searching madly for his sister, because perhaps within himself he is also thinking this: “I was the only man at home, she was in my area of responsibility too” — because the father told it — “Enes was such a gentleman kid that we would entrust his sister to him. So she could stand by him. So he could look after her. Osman is smaller; only he is smaller for Muhammed. Baran is a bit more mischievous,” he said. “He was a bit more sensible, so usually she would be in his sight, he would protect, watch over his sister.” The sister at home being lost — of course, it is normal that he feels the greatest weight of conscience upon himself. We spoke with him a lot. He told us a lot.
Enes’s Defense Approach and the Cornfield Allegation
He told us a part at the previous session; this session he could not even enter those. We actually said, “Tell yourself a bit,” but insistently, hearing the accusations — his own choice, we will not interfere of course — he will make his own defense; he stood up regarding the accusations. “Why are you accusing me?” he asked. He went into cornfields. Now, does a cornfield make these scratches? Do I need to show the pictures? Though they are in the file, Presiding Judge. We showed them at the previous session too, they were everywhere; everyone saw too. Is the leaf’s cutting element — yes, or no? Anyone who has dealt with A4 paper knows, but it seems funny to one who has not dealt with it. It is very sharp and cutting. It has cut our hands a lot. When we were reading at university, in these files right now my hand has been cut a lot, but if you say to a person who does not know — if he sees the cut — he will say “paper cut, how does paper cut?” It cuts. Again, the leaf is thin, pointed; “no one entered the cornfield.” He had entered. At 18 years old — we always forget the human factor. The human factor is very important. At the age of 18, in the darkness of the night, for his lost sister, to enter and search “so nothing happens to her head too” — would he think of his own life there? Of course he searched like this, as if to die. Look, he hits his knees. “I said, a piece of news came; there is a child. Because it is an official thing, I never shared it.” Especially the image of the child really resembles Narin. The family sees it; “yes,” the father says. “It may be Narin.” He himself also said, “I may have wanted it to be similar, because at least I would know her place.” Let us understand what kind of psychology this is from here. A wounded person may be on the deathbed; one expects even his news — it is a hope, because hopelessness is the worst thing. The mother’s later phrase “at least let her have a grave” — mothers of missing ones know; only those who listen to them know. She had previously raised a disabled child. Maternal feeling is questioned too. So many things have been questioned.
Enes’s Self-Harm Incident and Memorial Hospital
Here, “the corncobs,” he says, “may have touched me.” He says, “I remembered later. I wanted to go to the hospital; when there was no hospital issue I roughed myself up a little there.” There were witnesses — we asked them too, now this will be said, “though we did this we only made witnesses heard on a money problem and on a matter of the grocery store.” Actually we could have brought witnesses, many witnesses. Although we did not bring witnesses, the Gürans apparently prepared all the witnesses — “the witnesses spoke as they wanted.” We did not contact any witness. Any witness. We only have our clients in detention. We meet with them. Yes, I can assure you we had no contact with any witness before the hearing in any way. Let everyone tell what they know, let the material truth come out. Still, an “organization” is being talked about — what kind of organization is it? What does the word “organized” mean, how does it happen? It is no longer possible to understand this. Now we requested the Memorial camera. We said, “It is important.” Thank you; the panel had it requested by hand. A camera came. We were afflicted by the ambulance. It stays behind the ambulance. Why did we want it? Because at the night hour, at that very moment, it was hot-on-hot, “it was not purple,” we said. A hundred percent can be understood from this, because the incident is in the daytime. If they are linking it to there — if the incident was in the daytime, when he came in the evening it should have been purple. Because he comes to the hospital at 01:30, at night. If at night around 01:30 there was an incident of being hit in the eye, it would be more red, not purple; this would be understood, we said. The other camera came too. Blurred, nothing is understood. Did you watch, Presiding Judge? Blurred, that is it.
The Bite Mark on His Arm and Prison Footage
He said — exactly corresponding to what he told — the tooth mark on his arm. The tooth mark on his arm — look, while Mr. Arif was speaking, without being aware at all from here, I too bit my hand because Mr. Arif really called out to the conscience of those with a conscience. I was very upset on the first day already. The reason why people’s family relatives were upset was that. I am a father too; losing a child is really a very heavy thing. I have not experienced it; God willing may God not make anyone experience it — we had twins. They went before they were born, but even that was heavy for the mother, for example. For me of course I had not established contact; it was not that much. Losing a child is probably the hardest thing in this world, I think. May God not make anyone experience it, no mother, no father. Now Enes is there, his father — prison conversations are actually unlawful evidence, but enter the file now. Yes yes, I cannot speak from there, I must be silent. Now opposite Mr. Arif, Baran told me. And Enes says. At the previous session he also said this, “I was going to harm myself, so my father would not be more upset,” he says. He cannot cry before his father. In men it is like this; in this region we cannot cry before the father. We go and sulk with the mother. We already brought that decision. We waited, that is, at the outset we did not object to this. “Something is being concealed by these people” is said. I say, “Their privacy was entered. You entered prison; personally, unlawful evidence, you entered it too. You looked, cut and pasted something, put it; you said ‘why is this so, why is that so?’” Anyway, as you said, let me not do too much here. As I said, he can cry before his mother, not before his father. His mother that day with her aunts, etc., is crying inside. A boy child probably [does not want] strangers’ crying, his own crying [to be seen]…
Yes. We were telling about the bite mark on his arm. Now, to his mother, as I said, a boy child cries, but that day besides his mother there are other women. It is not expected that he go and cry there, of course. The mother is crying, aunts etc. have come, other women have come, crying. Ultimately, it is a disappearance; they are worried. Inevitably we — also in this region — in such incidents when two women see each other they begin. Immediately crying, lamenting, shrieking. He too, seeing his mother crying — inevitably — now if my mother’s eyes well up while nothing is happening, opposite me my eyes too well up, my throat tightens. He enters the room, notices his father in front of the window. His narrative is: “I at that moment, so that my father would not hear my voice, I cried, I bit my arm.” Here the human side was not looked at. He bit his arm. Even on the first day the news — “when he went to forensic medicine, so that bite mark would not be seen, second bite, third bite, whatever, as you know.” So it was told. That there is a single bite is clear both from the image and from the report.
A TV Series Filmed About the Subject
I forgot — regarding the presumption of innocence, there is no incident in Turkey about which, while it is at the investigation stage, a TV series is filmed. As you know, a TV series was filmed exactly about this incident. An episode was dedicated to it. Enes is completely a drug addict, someone with deviant behaviors; again accusations against the mother — all accusing things. Whatever dirty information they heard, they heard from the press, was thrown into a basket, shaken, a series was created, aired. People unfortunately in this country believe in the reality of TV series — as we know, we have experienced this before. A character in a series died; in this country people performed a funeral prayer for him.
The Demonization of the Family in the Media and the Creation of a Counter-Perception
Unfortunately Turkey has gone through such a design. These people have been so monstrified, that — look at the first news; the first people looking for the missing daughter, then it began. “Here there are mass graves, there are many children’s graves.” Indeed, even serious journalists — “their children had been killed earlier, no autopsy was done concerning this, a suspicious situation, as if these are people who constantly kill their children.” There were such narratives, such monstrification, that “in their villages luxury cars, all are very rich.” Look, we see Salim’s car — had an accident; the other a Broadway. Two cars with his brother cars, the state of his house — I have seen it. About his house we actually submitted things too; they were important for the reenactment, for the narration. I will briefly touch on those in a moment. It was put into such a state — as I said, how it is told matters. As Malcolm X said, they told it in such a way that they drew such a Güran figure in our minds that these people can do anything. All illegality is in them. One came out and said “loansharks”; one came out and said “there are collective weapons, they are Hizbullah.” They could not place them on one side, but they achieved this: one must congratulate them. They brought leftists, conservatives, seculars — all of them on one front. No one in Turkey could do this. Only anti-Güran-ism achieved this. Everyone “beat the hellbeast, beat as much as you can.” Unfortunately our legal system also permitted this. We did not want to say; Fatih said one. There are insults, very serious insults. Not about all, but about some, yesterday we saw “no specific attribution” — non-prosecution is issued. We object, it is rejected. Is insulting a person a normal thing? They have already reduced insult to such a simple thing, made it subject to advance payment. “Pay the money, insult whomever you wish.” How can the state take money from me for insulting and I do not withdraw? This is unconstitutional. Esteemed deputy — God willing, here, they will carry this — in my view this regulation should be annulled. Such a…
Insult and the State of Justice in a State of Law
That is, this is not something acceptable. In a state of law, if everyone has the right to seek his right before the judicial authorities, will you stand up and play keyboard warrior regarding something you do not know at all? I claim that none of them can pass before Mr. Arif and say anything, because there are such keyboard warriors, they say it from behind. They say it to us too, they say it to everyone. There are, yes. Here too there are keyboard warriors. Now they will again curse, have us cursed; I do not care. For what? Because I am very much at ease in my conscience.
The Marks on Enes’s Back and Misinterpretations
Are the marks finished? Regarding the marks on his back — we were talking about TV series, right? Because of the series, as I said, all information was thrown. Such scenarios were drawn, told. People were designed like this. Insults, things — the topic was exactly this. I linked it here from there. The marks on his back — clearly, clearly evident — that there are acne marks, the marks clearly evident that there are acne marks on his back — even these were called “fingernail marks.” Under his arm, for example, there are acnes, completely unrelated subjects. On his foot too. That is, every part of his body was looked at. Every part. Every mark was attributed to something. If we do a reading, a reading about anyone’s life, pulling it elsewhere, a biased view is possible. This is possible about everyone. We can interpret this with a malicious perspective, pulling it elsewhere. In this file too, these marks — we do not know exactly how the death occurred. That is, we know from this angle: there is a man; he draws a scenario. His job, evidently, is drawing scenarios. “He bit his arm, then while getting rid of her, bit under his eye” — he said. I said, “Why is he stuck on biting?” “I,” he said, “in Turkey am the one who solves a murder from biting.” I researched, I found. There is a report of Mazlum-Der. Yes, because of another murder he victimized another family. For 40 months this family was detained because of this person. Now he appears everywhere as very prestigious. His statements are like this. As if 100%. “The security never errs, never happens” — because of a tooth mark he caused a married couple to be detained. Yes, then the killer turned out to be someone else. This couple turned out to be unrelated, and the murder weapon supporting their statements was found. Many things clearly 100% happened, the Court of Cassation upheld it, that couple stayed in detention for 40 months for no reason, only because of the compatibility of the tooth mark. In the murder he found, this — because of it the man has become a fetishist, lives with tooth fetishism. He seeks a tooth everywhere. “Under Enes’s eye is a tooth,” he said. “He bit Narin’s arm,” he said. “I don’t know what,” he said. Now let us look at how the tooth mark happened. The report says “in the upper tooth.” Now, if it is something related to Narin’s death, either Narin will bite or someone will bite to save her.
The Forensic Medicine Evaluation of the Bite Mark
For this to occur, it must be a very strong bite, and because the person will be pulling themselves away, this bite must be a deep mark and strong, and the lines — because they are toward rescuing, pulling — must go deeper. Such a mark should be a movement bite mark. It says clearly that the mark is not like that, and — “with the tips of the teeth,” it says. Actually this is a key sentence. From this angle: the pressure force is in the mouth, in the jaw. The center of weight — that is, the point of force — comes from the jaw. Forensic medics know. Let us ask about this. If a tooth has not applied a pressure from the jaw, this does not aim to cause pain — anatomy teaches. Enes demonstrated. That is why I said that, after putting his arm down, he places his head on top of it. The weight for him is not really to cause pain; it is “let me suppress myself.” “Let me suppress my crying with this.” It comes from above. This is consistent with his statement; the report actually does not say it is inconsistent. If it does not say inconsistent, we must base it on his statement. The most important thing, when the contrary cannot be proven, must be his statement; but the prosecutor’s office does not base it on this statement. It says, “This is a suspicious situation.” Everything we cannot understand has been called “suspicious.” Look, this is what happened: a small village, 300-400 people live. They probably suddenly encountered 1,700 gendarmerie personnel in the village — and Gestapo-like, a gendarmerie personnel everywhere. Probably most of them wait with notebooks in hand to record; whatever they see, they record. For example, “this one passed by here; why did he throw the trash there?” they have recorded. I understand it this way when I look at the records. Everything. People gave statements constantly. Look, do not think only of written statements. Mr. Arif told. He stayed at the thing for 6 days. After Narin was found, for 4 or 5 days, every day, he says, they would pick me up. For example, I was going — “By God, I never faced ill treatment, no one gave me bad treatment, said anything to me” — but every day they came with a new scenario.
Torture and Interrogation Techniques
And very dangerous, prohibited interrogation techniques were applied. He told of one at the hearing. In my view, a very heavy torture. Heavier than physical torture. They said, “We will now bring Enes; you will say to Enes, ‘Your mother said — she was here now, she said “Enes did it, son, Enes killed Narin,” your mother told me.’ I said to Enes; Enes went mad,” he says. “Beat his head against the walls. ‘Father, how can you say this to me’ — even while telling it at the hearing yesterday, Enes again could not bear it. Is there really such a thing? My hair stands on end when I say this. What kind of interrogation technique is this? Is there torture beyond this to be done? Physical torture is definitely better than this. Definitely better. This is not acceptable. Look, we are in 2024. That torture is a crime against humanity — we all know it. All jurists are saying it, all the media knows, says it; but ‘if it is done to these,’ we say, ‘it is normal.’ ‘It is normal,’ we said. At the first session I said one thing; you reacted. All right, you are right, the topic should not slide from here, but the press does not know this, forgive me, I will say this. We were not going to say this subject. We — our clients, since these reports were not taken in the first days — said, ‘let us apply.’ They said, ‘No, we will not apply. There was a situation concerning our daughter. “This was done to us so that our daughter would be found,” we think. If not this harsh — maybe my daughter — I do not accept this; they themselves accept it, but I do not accept.’ There were no reports. The footage perhaps can be taken, we said. Perhaps when we went to the hospital, they said ‘we did not get out of the vehicle.’ The doctor came to the vehicle — ‘Anything? Nothing, probably’ — it was written without being asked to us. One person was given — we said. ‘Let us go through this one person, no,’ they said. Anyway, we said ‘then this subject will not be opened again.’ ‘All right,’ we said, ‘it was not opened again.’ Enes opened it here. I am telling this for those who did not see, did not know, or did not understand. The panel understood what that situation was.
Enes’s Account of Torture
Questions were asked of Enes. “Why did you give contradictory statements? Why did you say this here?” Enes said, “You do not know what I experienced.” It was repeated. “Enes, look, you said so and so, you said so” — but “then,” he said, “I will tell something; it will not.” In the record it passes the same way: “I will tell something, it will not.” Now, “Tell,” it was said, “we are here for you to tell.” The one asking the question — “We are here to listen to you.” Then he said, “I want to ask my lawyers something.” “After talking, I will speak, right, Presiding Judge?” The record stands exactly like that. There is footage too. He turned here to us. We are here too. He took two steps, turned. “Shall I tell?” he said. If I had said “do not tell” there, what would everyone have said? “The child was going to speak, they did not let him speak.” We of course could not say that. “Tell, tell what you want,” we said. The child then told of the torture. Then they said, “In the torture you did not accept anything. Why did you tell this subject?” All right, he did not accept — the context of the question you ask comes from this: “you are saying there is a contradiction.” Do not forget, he has lost his sister, was taken into custody; at 18 years old, in his head there is a constant difference about the hours. What is important is after 18:00 or after 15:00? Because there is someone who says she saw her after 18:00. Salim too fell there; the hour he was mistaken about — which hour was important? No one organized regarding the hours; on the contrary, those who said the hour wrongly are being taken and interrogated. There are live broadcasts, they entered the file, social-media posts — perhaps our colleague will watch, perhaps watch the video. Mr. Arif on the first day told; “Maşallah’s daughter says 17:40; Mr. Arif interrogates this. ‘How 17:40?’ Why can he not interrogate? The road to Hüseyin Güran’s house — if you go from the Arifs, you must pass in front of the school.”
The Family’s Own Investigation and Inconsistencies in Witness Statements
She appears on the school camera. They look at the camera; “Narin is not there,” they say. Perhaps the gendarmerie says, “Maybe she went around from the back, or went through the lower road.” Mr. Arif, Ms. Yüksel also, says it in her interview. “My daughter is a smart daughter; if my daughter was going to come to her home, if she was going to go there, she would not lengthen the road from the path.” That is, what? There is no organization. On the contrary, there is interrogation. There is investigation of the truth. Look, the family — that is, Arif and the mother Yüksel, the father Arif — interrogates this. They interrogate their closest. Again they interrogate their distant ones too. İsa Kaya is not a relative; they call and ask. “You say ‘I saw at 18:00’; how did you see? Where did you see? How did you see alone? Why did others not see? Because there are people there besides you. Only you are saying ‘I saw,’” the mother says. “I was going to tear the place apart, I was tearing it apart. İsa is a bit older; when he said ‘I saw,’ I relaxed a bit,” she says. A big individual comes, at 17 years old, says “I saw.” Probably it is true, she says. “Why would he make it up?” Later Şeyma says, “I saw.” As you know, we determined her. It was her hour confusion. When she gave the password to a cooking program, we looked — all right. At what hour is the program etc. — was understood. That is, this too again is not a relative.
Maide Kaya’s Statement and the Time Contradiction
The small child Maide Kaya — there is a reenactment. Everyone watched it. “She went home,” she says. Look, went home, that is, the last one who saw. At the hour the girl said, she was already long dead. Narin had long been killed. “She” says after 18:00. “She says she saw at 18:40.” She was playing in front of the school, appears on camera. Looking, another child says, “I heard, while Maide was speaking, I did not see Narin, but I heard Maide calling to Narin toward the hilltop, but nothing is there.” Look, the family interrogates these. That is, the mother too interrogates with her own mind. As much as she can express herself, interrogate, she interrogates. That is, it is not a trained police officer, a person who knows everything. As much as her own mind can take in, she perceives and can interrogate. She interrogates, looks — but as I said, constantly statements — besides the written ones — constantly someone comes, “Tell, what happened?” They tell constantly. As I said, what matters is which hour, which hour must be told more carefully; the human brain codes its past memories with certain things. This is a scientific study; in a moment our colleague will tell the details. For example, for me to remember what time it was when I went out of the house this morning, what do I do? If I have spoken with someone on the phone, I look at that, do coding. The Diyarbakır Bar said, for example, “There is no coding regarding Birsen.” I too say there is. I will submit her HTS — belonging to Birsen. The HTS record — as you know, if you look at the school camera of Birsen’s house, many children came and went that day. Many, many children came and went. Among them is Narin too. Narin’s other cousins are also there. Maşallah’s other nephews are also there. Many come and go. We can understand this from the camera. The children’s statements have also been taken. They already say a part.
Birsen’s Statement and Time Coding
Now, when time coding is done by the first coming, the second coming — she must have fallen into an error. Now a moment ago you saw the statement of the one, Nevzat Bahtiyar. Sometimes, while a statement is being taken, the statement-giver’s statement is written; sometimes what the statement-taker understood is written; sometimes, unfortunately, he writes what he wants to understand. In this investigation Birsen’s statement became like this, in the statement taken at the prosecutor’s office. How do we understand? Probably about an hour passed without anything happening. When she went to the peace-court judge, her statement is mentioned. This is about the Salim direction matter. “In the prosecutor’s office statement, as if Salim came, told her ‘You must say 17:40.’” Let us look at the interrogation. What does Birsen say in the interrogation? Birsen in the interrogation says, “I did not say that. While we were talking with Melike, Brother Salim heard and came to us.” “What is it?” he said. “We said, ‘We cannot be sure: was it Mina who came at 17:40? Did Narin come earlier? Because on the school camera she also does not appear. Are we mistaken, or are they?’ Because when Mr. Arif asked, Mr. Arif said ‘if you have a mistake, think again’; these entered an interrogation among themselves. They cannot be sure. Salim too said — it passes in the statement — ‘Tell what you know to be true. Do not keep changing your statement.’” This is a very correct thing. “Tell what you know. Tell the truth. Do not change your statement.” But the prosecutor’s office [writes] “Salim heard, ‘If 17:40, then 17:40’” — and in the continuation he also says, “if what you know to be true is at 17:40, tell ‘17:40.’” The prosecutor’s office does not take that there. “We had to say ‘17:40.’” Yes, this is something that increases suspicion. Is this Birsen’s word? Look, we saw it in Nevzat’s statement. If only his footage had also existed, if only his footage had existed. Now they say there is a CMK attorney. In the presence of the attorney, Nevzat’s attorney is also there. Things not Nevzat’s statement passed — on camera — we all see. Now where did Birsen do the coding from? Many children come and go to Birsen’s house. Birsen does not know — she said at the hearing too. She did not know they went to the mosque. How did we combine this piece? We talked with her. She said at the hearing too. Afterwards, the Şeyma Kaya grape-picking matter. We fully understood. When Narin came, Birsen says, “Hatice and Fatma went to the grandmothers.” Their grandmothers are on the side of those Şeymas next to the mosque. Narin goes there. When Narin went there, she waits directly; the girls are ashamed to go in or whatever. Şeyma Kaya sees her there. They are picking grape leaves there. She gives her a grape. There is also such a way to read these pieces, but people did not prefer to read. “Since you researched so well, 1,700 personnel, says 17:40” — a program too, he says. Let me open it: what hour is that program? Also look; we opened it and looked; you look too. Such a sensitive file, look. The piece fits. She directly says she was too shy to enter the mosque. The mosque imam says, “I saw, I called. She was in front of the door with the other children, I called, she came.” This piece also fits. She was already late getting into the mosque. We said, “What could this 17:40 matter be?” Yes, exactly from Birsen’s phone her mother talked. She talked with her aunt. There is also a phone-screen image. Birsen’s HTS, at no. 103, registered to Taner Mehmetoğlu, on the phone, on August 21 at 17:40. Let me show exactly.
Ms. Maşallah’s Phone Call and the Confirmation of Time Coding
No, I had not submitted this. That one — Ms. Maşallah’s HTS was shown. Ms. Maşallah’s is not there either. The phone number belongs to Birsen. Ms. Maşallah speaks via Birsen’s phone. I do not know the kinship relations — her husband’s sibling was what? Sister-in-law. His görümce (husband’s sister), right? No, no. Maşallah’s görümce. She is her görümce; with her görümce she talks at 17:40. So there is a conversation. The coding was done this way. “Mom was talking on the phone.” That is, such a sharp time interval is given. “This sharpness — how can it be?” we too said. She is talking on the phone, there is even a screen image. They did not delete the phone, they sent it to us. We will submit that too in the thing, but because this is HTS it is more reliable. Since they can play with the data, with everything — how does this family — I do not know. They did not even know their own pedometer…
The Reliability of the National Criminal Bureau Reports
Now the National Criminal Bureau’s reports. Are these reports? Since it is mentioned in the opinion I must touch on it. The Diyarbakır Bar really, as I said, I respect their work. The juristry — at least when they see something, saying “this is wrong,” is there. They already say it. They did not say anything about this, because they too can quite clearly see and discern what is real and what is not. I thank them for their such contributions to the adjudication. Now, in the conversations there, the word “prosecutor” definitely does not pass. It did not take most of the words that pass. What we could hear, but as I said, that conversation has no integrity of meaning. Besides, in our opinion that evidence is unlawful evidence. How it was obtained is not clear. It was not obtained in a manner in accordance with the law. For this reason, in our opinion, it should [be removed] from among the file; we had objected. We do not know how this came. How can these documents be obtained? Because that camera recording is at the chief public prosecutor’s office. Only in the file that is closed to us. It came from there. We do not accept it.
The Pixel Shifts and Time Differences in the Footage
Again about the footage — yesterday my colleague told, there is a story with a slope. That is very important. That the slope there, because of the camera angle, is not understood and has been accepted as flat — as if. Pixel shift, that is, we took the footage. We understood it would not be here. We spoke with many people; we understood it would not be here. My colleague told; Mr. Tuncay — we partly sent to abroad, we are waiting. Even if it comes after the hearing, perhaps it will make a contribution to the material truth. There — pixel shift — when I took the footage and sent it to the family, excitedly to me, “Look, Nevzat is taking here. Look, Nevzat is taking here.” I said, “What you see as these dark spots, I see everywhere. If I go out with this, I will look ridiculous. I will not go out anywhere with this,” I said. That is, the road cannot be walked with this. This does not happen this way, I said. I did not take it into account at all, but the National Criminal — that could not distinguish between a tractor and a car, between blue and red — where it could not distinguish, could distinguish Narin. What kind of eyes he has. We already said it is a very dubious place. We also objected. For that reason also — there is a timing matter, Presiding Judge. In your letter we knew 6 minutes; you said 6 minutes 45 seconds. Probably a letter came regarding this.
The Place Narin Was Last Seen and Time Contradictions
Now we know the place where Narin was last seen. The school camera says at 15:11:15, she left. “She was last seen at 14:00.” According to the work done by the Criminal himself, 15:11:14 is the last sight of the tip of her foot. On the tenth page, on the twelfth page, we will take 6 minutes 45 seconds back from this recording. 15:18:49; when we go back 6 minutes, 15:12:04. Exactly 50 seconds have passed. 50 seconds — from in front of the school, that is, from the place she was last seen across the way, to what he calls the barn — 50 seconds. He teleports her. That darkness — that is, Narin — stands there. We submitted the drone footage too. Most of the journalists went there too. 50 seconds, even a child running cannot climb there. They cannot climb that slope in 50 seconds. How will she climb? Here, in 50 seconds in front of the barn. And not at the house. The darkness goes to in front of the barn, because for what? Public opinion was expecting something here. What? “Let these be guilty, let them get the punishment” — there was such a situation. They too, as I said — I said something bold, “we took the file at once, we will solve this business” — immediately made an explanation. “Everyone will see soon,” something like that he said, shared; we saw. He “solved” so many things. These pixel shifts, as I said, are everywhere. We cannot take this into consideration. Something that is not possible time-wise. He is trying to feed us as if it is possible. If only you had not had the second report taken from there. We already objected. We had requested the rejection of the expert. Before it could be done, the report came. It does not matter. It did not come, right, Presiding Judge? — regarding the mobile base stations?
New Evidence Concerning Mr. Salim and the Violation of Legal Principles
Now three new concrete pieces of evidence have emerged concerning Mr. Salim. In my view three very important pieces of evidence. The bank receipt, the pedometer, and also the vehicle that was there at night — Mr. Onur played it, actually, unfortunately here because there was not a great silence it was not understood well. I too listened very carefully; footsteps come, and underneath, either a little girl’s or a little child’s voice comes toward the end of the conversation. The 22:41 conversation. The car at exactly that moment — indeed news was made about it — the car is in motion at that moment. Footsteps come. Clear. Even — when I played the conversation that was made with that person to the family, Hacı Kaya, someone, I think, who was with him during the conversation he made in Istanbul, he remembered the conversation. He said, “I was with him. We — from in front of the school, in fact,” he says, “just before that, from in front of the school we were going toward the fountain,” he said. “Very nice,” I said. “Let us come to the school camera, we will find it.” But Salim’s footage at those hours in the village, inside the village, the school camera was not taken at those hours. We requested, it did not come. Those hours are not there. There is nothing in his favor, but what about the family? As I said, a salad was made, everything thrown in, stirred. With information pollution, “explain these.” Now, in our criminal adjudication, a person has to prove their own innocence. That is, we say to a person about something not done “you did this. Prove you did not do it.” Right now, at this stage. “Prove that you did not.” How much does this comply with the fundamental principles of criminal law? When we look at the indictment, everyone said this: joint perpetration. We are all jurists, we all understand what we read. Please, let us defend the law that I say. From here joint perpetration does not come out, because there is no sentence explaining which perpetrator did which act, how dominion was established over which act, how the intent of participation was put forward. What I cannot understand — “he says something”; there are strange things in the opinion. That is, in the indictment, and in its continuation in the opinion, I cannot understand these. These seem strange to me. That means they have a finger in everything. How lucky — somehow it can be explained; something comes out. Perhaps if we had more time, what things would come out — but look, truly it must be taken seriously and examined, studied. We have concern, because there is a dreadful pressure. No one is given the opportunity to know and tell the truth. Jurists, as I said, come out or forensic medics come out; when they tell the truth, they are subjected to a lynching. “So you became a Güran-supporter.” Society has such a mass, ready to divide. Why? Because people bought a story. In this story this family was to be guilty. Those who played on this and the journalists who became very popular thanks to this, the “doyen” journalists, people whose name, fame, title was unknown on social media, became known. Like this, he is now consulted. “That person can say something on that subject” — people who would never reach him began to reach him and get his opinion. So, abnormal. In 3 days the names of most of these will be forgotten. Presiding Judge, with your permission.
Those Playing a Role in the Case and the Rejection of New Evidence
Some of the people, as I said, determined a role for themselves here. They played on this. Although they see some truths, so that the resistance will not be broken, they impose other ideas. What are these? A payment receipt came from a bank. Immediately the man stands up and refutes this. “Where did he go to the bank?” Good, but who says he went to the bank? Automatic payment. The man already says “I am at home.” “It is an automatic payment.” The court will prove this. Leave it, “this is immediately not so,” because in his own mind he has bought a ticket: “definitely these must be guilty.” Because otherwise he himself will lose all prestige. Perhaps he will not have any reputation.
Ramazan Atasoy’s Detention and Journalism
Unfortunately, as I mentioned a moment ago, there is a journalist who is the reason for Ramazan Atasoy’s detention in this country. He still continues his journalism. He does not come out and say, “I conveyed wrongly.” Look, everyone knows that the translation there is a joke. That child is in detention because of a wrong translation. That it is wrong is documented, stands in the file. The prosecutor’s office also knows, but what did he say? “That joke of the child belongs to you” was said. Very clear. It is very clear that it is a joke. Again the child’s “I will turn around and look” — in Kurdish “I will turn around and look” — was called “‘she has not died yet.’” Indeed “the girl has not died yet” was said. That journalist also added the word “girl.” That is not in the translation. In the wrong translation — the gendarmerie’s wrong translation — the gendarmerie says, “Look, the first translation may be this thing. ‘She has not finished yet.’ The second meaning may be ‘she has not died yet.’” He stood up; by divorcing it from its context, while the indictment was being drafted, he said, “words have been added to some records.” My prosecutor removed those words, thank you. For example, in the records there was something like Yüksel Güran was “as if certain” her daughter had died; those parts — “it was as if definitely certain” — you have removed. In the records words added not present in the record — there are many such things, now we have seen this. At 14 years old, at least for him, for the Gürans — this child has no connection with the Gürans. We are not his lawyer either, but I see, my conscience aches. Simply because of a wrong translation, a laborer, a poor child, is still in detention. The child is a child. The child, a child. On the first day he came here, we all saw his fear in his eyes. In AGO he said, “If I knew something I would tell,” but as I said, if he came into contact, “he can be detained because of these people, can receive the heaviest punishment” is the perception. Because — “why did he form a sentence that could protect Salim to his own interest? How can he form it? He should not form it either, he should accuse. This way Salim should receive the punishment.” Everyone’s perception, viewpoint was this. The child is still a hostage, I think. Why is our file not opened? Why does it not go together? So much time has passed; there is no evidence collected. No action is taken. We make requests; our requests are not even processed. Can there be such a thing? Can there be such a thing? What shall we do? That is, shall we not appear on the media or go into the field? Nothing is left we can do from our hand. As I said, a design was created. At least can we break it — how shall we break it? Let me say it too, let us give the correct documents, narrate to people through documents: “Look, it is not like this.”
The DNA on the Carpets and the Gendarmerie’s Procedures
Carpets were mentioned — “there is DNA on the carpets.” Let me say: how healthily were those examinations done? Which work done by the gendarmerie was done healthily? I claim that too was unhealthy, not done properly. On carpets there is hair and other things too. Only with a blue light they looked, because they were searching for something like blood or cadaveric fluid — there is no other DNA. They clung to something, clung to a possibility. “If the girl, as he says, cadaveric fluid came from her mouth, we carried out the examination this way,” they said. But there is DNA. There are other DNAs. I claim there are others beyond what there is. “No, the carpets were washed, that’s why there is nothing.” How? “No DNA at all”? Well, who told the press this? Again, the gendarmerie. I claim they told it. They said, “There is such a thing.” Now he will say “there is none” — at the investigation stage, the prosecutor’s office did not leak. The CMK attorneys — Mr. Nahit, our president, explains. “He instructed them all. All were marked.” No leak from our Diyarbakır Bar attorneys — so from whom then was it leaked? Let us not forget, there is even a photograph of Ms. Yüksel with handcuffed hands while in the interrogation. There is one of her coming before the judge with handcuffs. There are photographs, in the press. What shall we explain further? To whom shall we say what? For days, for hours, we explain these. We try to explain these, but it does not work.
Contradictions in Nevzat Bahtiyar’s Description of the House and Misinterpretations
We have photographs of the house. We asked him. “Which room did you enter?” “On the left,” he said at first. “He said left, but I do not know what is in the room,” he said. We submitted the footage. The expert, in the narrowed base station, says “empty room.” There is no such thing as “empty room.” In the house all rooms are full. The gendarmerie also knows. There are photographs of a part. Where might “empty room” be? Where? I am saying. We said it is a wrong probability calculation. With a wrong probability calculation they proceed. Nevzat Bahtiyar went out, took the girl. He put her in his own barn. This region — as Fatih showed yesterday, there is that regional thing — we can interpret it as we wish. Yes, in triangulation, in that region a place appears; we could interpret it as we wish. Regarding joint perpetration — fine, ultimately think, you have taken a mother, detained her. Afterwards, saying “sorry” is probably not easy either. “Concrete, strong evidence” — but what would have been necessary was, there must be such strong evidence. Then we too should have said, “Fine, ultimately there is something in the middle” — but no, there is not in the file.
The Request for Acquittal for Enes Güran
I can say this in this case. Look. I am truly proud of defending my own clients, of being in this case. God willing, I was able to carry this out sufficiently worthily. Finally, regarding the file — yes, there is much we can tell. We have partly submitted it in writing. We previously told at the last session. Let me not repeat. My colleagues will also tell. I have tired you very much. Thank you for patiently listening. I thank you separately for your patience during the adjudication process. When the whole file is evaluated, there is no evidence sufficient to accuse my client Enes Güran. By the principle that the defendant benefits from doubt — probably it will be so, because too much doubt was created, unfortunately; also, a respected journalist of ours coined the phrase “suspect inflation” in this file. Truly a very nice phrase. In this file there was suspect inflation. Everyone became a suspect. I request that the acquittal of the client be decided in accordance with the principle of in dubio pro reo.
Social Media and Criticism of Legal Insults
Just to leave a dirty spot in our heads. Please, let no dirty spot remain in our heads. It was said about our file, “Osman’s phone”; if there had been something, it would have been entered. He said about Mr. Arif, “I did not see any deletion.” There is no document on this in the file. You also said so. Something not in this file will not exist. Now, for example, the deletion matters; there are no deletions in my two clients, but for the others, I said, “Who deleted?” They said Kurtuluş. I called him, “Kurtuluş, what did you delete?” He said, “Brother, I delete WhatsApp, but it already stands on the other side. For example, I have spoken with this one on a call, I deleted it there, but when you enter the person’s own chat it already writes there. It still has not been deleted there. I deleted from one place, something like that. Not from everywhere.” The other one deleted something — Fuat, from Google, his history-deletion about himself. The man was staying in Van for months. How do we know what happened, what finished. What is it to us? We entered private life. Look, we entered into everything of people. No one was examined this way. Every single one, from age seven to seventy, even though they had no connection with the offense, was examined in every respect. Fuat, why did you look at deleting your search history on Google — the man is working, a worker. How do we know what he did? What is it to us? Shall we talk about this? Is this our subject?