Defense by Salim Güran’s Counsel for the Defendant
Law. Onur Akdağ
Nevzat’s Contradictory Statements
If you remember, my first defense had disturbed Nevzat very much, Presiding Judge. Nevzat, who was standing like a log, suddenly reacted. Unfortunately, we are going to keep disturbing him. In our law there is the principle of the indivisibility of confession. If a lie is revealed in one of a person’s statements, his other statements are not given credit, but Mr. Nevzat is something else. Everyone knows that things conforming to reason and logic must also conform to the law, and things conforming to the law must also conform to reason and logic, so that we may place them before you as evidence. How are we to fit Nevzat’s 6 statements, together with the one here — 6 false declarations — into reason, logic, law and conscience? At every development, at every new piece of evidence or situation, Nevzat changes his statement. We too are unfortunately spectators to this. How many more times will we wait for Nevzat to change his statement? Will no one come out and say to this man, “Enough, be quiet; we are fed up with your lies”? Now, Presiding Judge, wherever a person goes missing, the search begins at the nearest point. The usual suspects are also in the first line. Here Nevzat’s house is the one closest to the path. Narin went missing on August 21. Salim was taken into custody on August 30 because of the DNA. Nevzat was taken into custody on September 8. If Nevzat had been identified immediately — that is, if he could have been found before Salim — he would have had no narrative. Nevzat was given the opportunity to construct a fiction and to shift the crime onto someone else’s neck. Nevzat was taken into custody two and a half weeks later. And this was not because he came forward as an informant, not because he surrendered; on the contrary, he was caught while hiding like a coward under the bed in his son’s house. The reason for his capture is that the gendarmerie, days later, thought of looking at the farm camera that overlooks the crime scene. The farm camera was looked at only 19 days later, the DARAN-2 was looked at 19 days later — and the rotating cameras had been wiped — the chains of omission are countless. When they examined the farm camera, they realized that a red car had gone down to the stream, and only then did they see Nevzat. When they took him into custody, Nevzat told us two separate stories, and then these two stories gradually multiplied. In one he said that uncle Salim was carrying the body in the front seat of his car — look, not in the trunk, not in the back seat, but in the front seat so that everyone would see.
Changes in Nevzat’s Body-Carrying Stories and the Timing of the Incident
Why does he say it this way? Because the investigative authority, in a file for which it had issued a confidentiality order, was itself openly distributing wholesale even the DNA reports, all the documents. Nevzat is getting the information about the DNA found in the Van Kriminal report dated August 30 from the media; that is why he does not say “trunk,” that is why he does not say “back seat” — “I got out of the car, he got out too; pointing at the front seat of the car he said, ‘Get rid of this, otherwise I will kill you and your family; if you do, I will also give you 200,000 TL.’ He said, ‘Is there a sack in the trunk of the car?’ We took the sack out of the trunk, put it in the sack together; ‘Take it to the stream,’ he said.” That is the whole story. One day later at the prosecutor’s office he changed the story. He said, “Actually I was watering the garden with a hose. Salim shouted to me from above, saying ‘Wait, I am coming,’ said, ‘Do not go anywhere, I have business with you,’ and then came to me with his car and said ‘Follow me.’ We went together to the cemetery road; we got out of our cars.” This time he said he took the body not by placing it in a sack there, but by receiving it from Salim who slid it out of a blanket, that he took it to his house, placed it in a sack at his house, and then took it in the sack to the stream. That is, this is his story in this way. Now, what has been insistently overlooked here: we have in our hands approximate information as to when this murder could have been committed. Narin was last seen at 15:11 on the school camera. She was already killed along that road. The car in which the girl was found dead was at the stream at 15:40 — that is, there are 29 minutes between. Shall I tell you the minute of Narin’s death? Look — the minute of death. Narin gives up her life in Nevzat’s hands at 15:13. There remain 27 minutes. 5–6 minutes for reaching the stream, at most 21 minutes. And if we think that the child walked up the path — let us subtract 2 more minutes — at most we are talking about a 19-minute time interval. Who can explain to me, in reason and in logic, the commission of this murder by a large number of perpetrators in a complex plot within 19 minutes? Therefore, the number of defendants must be as few as possible and the plot of the event must be as simple as possible. That is, it must not be complex, but now what happened? Here, the gendarmerie’s fault was very great. For 19 days the child could not be found.
Errors of the Gendarmerie in the Investigation and Wrongful Detentions
The place that should have been searched was not searched, what needed to be done was not done, and Nevzat was not identified at the outset. When the perpetrator could not be identified, all sorts of records were concocted. When they could not find the perpetrator, they tried to produce one. I say it very clearly, Presiding Judge: had the gendarmerie first detained a person named Ahmet, Nevzat would have had time to fictionalize his statement accordingly. After Salim he had a full 9 days, and let us also not forget the unfortunate “good news” that the gendarmerie commander gave. At that time Narin was of course under the stream; when the law enforcement could not solve the murder, it became aggressive, and when it became aggressive, it made mistakes — and beyond mistakes, it made them deliberately: the family’s torture allegations, false and misleading records, “this one has a relationship with that one,” “there is intelligence that he has a relationship with his sister-in-law,” and so on and so forth. In the end, after forty years, when it had a murder file in hand, the gendarmerie stumbled, it smeared it all over its face, and it was defeated by its own ambition. Had this job been given to the police, to the Police Kriminal, it would not have happened this way. With every statement the gendarmerie chased a different story; whatever anyone said, the time the child was last seen changed accordingly; times changed, perpetrators changed; they ran after every single story and the matter became insoluble. At the end of the day, the story of Nevzat, who was caught thanks to the camera recordings, was taken to the center of the investigation. The investigation was conducted according to whatever Nevzat said. The base-station study was done according to him. Whereas there was only one person whose guilt was certain — and that was Nevzat. For this reason, in the direction of Nevzat’s statement, starting with the Güran family, whoever they could lay hands on they threw inside. To such an extent that Salim is being asked whether he has any connection with at least 3 women. Two of them are one thing; one of them is his uncle’s wife. Be ashamed! How many women does a person sleep with in a village, and are all of these his relatives? The gendarmerie and the prosecutors built the entire investigation on private life. We understand, you say, “You have, for example, 177 calls with your sister-in-law; would you explain this to us?” — you must be suspicious; you were not. But can there be such a question — for God’s sake — “Is there one missed call between you and do you communicate only through missed calls?” We can only laugh at this, Presiding Judge.
Criticism of the Direction of the Investigation and the Lack of Concrete Evidence
With an orientalist perspective, by pushing the investigation as much as possible below the belt, this investigation was conducted almost through moral judgments; and the reason for this is the media and the placing of the statement of the killer named Nevzat at the center. Whereas the investigation should have proceeded with concrete data. For example, instead of asking whether a woman had a television at home, you could have searched Nevzat’s house; or while you were taking Narin’s 7 uncles and 3 aunts into custody, for instance, you could have taken Nevzat’s wife into custody — the questions you would ask would be very different. The man says “I took the body to my house.” Brother, look, at that moment was there anyone at home besides Nevzat or not? Even this question was not asked, Presiding Judge, because they went after a story. Was Nevzat’s wife not at home? Why at least did you not feel the need to detain his wife? He has so many false statements. Besides, doesn’t Gazal’s statement strike you as contradictory? Has not Muhammed been in a cell for 3 months because he found a slipper? Gazal Bahtiyar is perhaps at least one of those who saw the body. Look, I say “at least.” At least one of those who committed the murder, or one of those who instigated it. We have great suspicions on this matter. Presiding Judge, did you never have a suspicion of Gazal? The man says “I took the body home”; they do not search the house. The gendarmerie even accompanied his wife while she moved the household items. My goodness — from where items might be carried, from where the body could have been carried — why is the household being moved? Is that not a crime scene anymore? But the gendarmerie, unable to find the perpetrator in this matter, as a result of public pressure increased the perpetrators as much as possible, and ultimately there were 12 detainees. Now I ask you, Presiding Judge: 12 people were taken into custody. Let them be taken, let it be fair — but where is the result? At the end of the day, could we find a single killer? So much investigation was done — statements, records, did this one sleep with that one, did that one turn on his television? You asked all the questions; well, did you ever ask yourself this question: who killed Narin? Why was Narin killed? Where was Narin killed? Where was Narin killed, brother, where was she killed? You could not find the answers to these questions. Well, to be able to find the answer to this question, did you pursue the real evidence enough? I say: no. Unfortunately, no.
Interests in the Case, Media Perception, and Nevzat’s Manipulation
Now, unfortunately, many people have interests, stakes, and designs in this file. Some want to stay on a different agenda, some want to take center stage, some want to make money off Narin’s memory, some have enmity with the family and seize the opportunity, some hate the concept of family itself or hate Kurds, and see this as an opportunity. How does a journalist defend Nevzat to the death, target those who criticize Nevzat? What happened to impartial journalism, what happened — did they prevail over the sun? Presiding Judge, have you heard of the concept of “wishful thinking”? It is making an optimistic assumption about a subject without any objective evidence, and the person tending to think in the direction of the result his own heart desires. Society wants the family to come out of this. Because they have been made to believe this by being hammered. That is, everyone bet on a horse; “let my horse win,” they are saying. This is not religion, it is not faith; we are not even rooting for a football team; we are not playing a horse race. How dreadful Narin’s death was — I am saying — to be wrongly accused of being killed unjustly is just as dreadful, friends, is it not? Why don’t they want to understand this? Why the partisanship for Nevzat? We cannot understand. Nevzat is now saying: “I alone got the better of the village; I both slandered their chastity, and I killed their daughter, perhaps he even assaulted her; and I dropped my sin on their necks.” In the end, what is he saying? “I ate, I drank, and left you with the bill.” An entire society applauds the killer. Even if it is 10 hearings, he will be before us with 10 different fictions; perhaps he will say a word against our chastity. “Beware, do not blame Nevzat at all; do not lay it on Nevzat’s neck” — those who point their finger at the state and its institutions, when will those fingers be broken? When things are this far out of line, we only say: “Where is the state’s mind and authority?” Let us say this: Nevzat played all of Turkey like a puppet on his finger, and unfortunately continues to do so. Now I want to talk a little about the HTS records between Nevzat and Salim, esteemed Presiding Judge. According to the communication-determination information of Nevzat and Salim, Salim last called Nevzat on May 21, 2024; after that date Salim does not call Nevzat again. From time to time Nevzat himself calls. There are a total of 47 telephone calls between them.
Communications Between Salim and Nevzat, Other Contradictions in the Statements, and the PSA Finding
As we stated earlier, after the money matter between Arif and Nevzat, Salim no longer communicates with Nevzat, he does not meet with him, he does not even greet him. When we go back from the date of the incident, for a full 3 months Salim does not call Nevzat. He does not call, does not call. “Look, I did not call you for three months; I am not going to speak with you, I will not even greet you; but I am going to kill the child and make you a partner in my sin, is that so?” Now it is being said: “If Nevzat did it, why did you not say ‘Nevzat’ at the outset?” Nevzat is acting after the child disappeared. Looking Arif in the eye, he consoles himself, saying, “God is great, she will be found,” offers him a cigarette, they even pray together. He pats the backs, virtually hypnotizes the whole family, and naturally no one suspects him. But still, Arif and Salim say, “It could be Nevzat”; however, the law enforcement does not put it in the records, does not take it into consideration. Another situation: in his statement dated September 16, Mehmet Bahtiyar says that he was working together with Nevzat in Çarıklı until 17:00. Despite this, he is still free. If it is said that this statement was entered into the records incorrectly, then why is the same consideration not given to the Gürans? That is, if a thing Mehmet did not say while giving his statement is added to his statement, we believe it; but when it is the Gürans, “do not leave the gendarmerie under suspicion,” we say. Vedat Bahtiyar first calls Salim, then he calls Nevzat. Now here you suspect Salim; I too suspect Vedat. Well, in both cases Vedat should be detained, should he not? At the end of the day, a sequential call is made and this is believed. That is, in both cases he has become a partner in the offense. Now we come to the matter of PSA, Presiding Judge. In the Forensic Medicine Report dated September 12, in the microscopic examination of the slides prepared from the samples reported to belong to Narin Güran — vaginal swab 1, the swab from the outer part of the underwear, the stains identified on the underwear, the stains identified on the purple skirt, the stains identified on the headscarf — no sperm cells were seen, but Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) found in semen and urine was detected. Although PSA was detected in the report, it is also said that this can be found in women too.
The Sexual Assault Allegation and Nevzat’s Pedophilia Profile
Of course — since the child was found in the stream bed, dirty water flowing into the stream, human feces may have been smeared on her — that is what is said. That is, we do not know; it is within the realm of possibility. But if we are to speak of an allegation of abuse, are we going to see as the perpetrator, first, the uncle or the elder brother — or are we going to see Nevzat, who had become an enemy of the family, who had borne a grudge against the father, perhaps burning with the desire for revenge, and whose psychology, when analyzed, may point to a background of pedophilia? Which is the more likely possibility in your view? If there are two scenarios constructed over Salim and Enes, and if it is said that there was “something which should not have been seen,” can the result of this be abuse? If there was an attempt at abuse against the child, or a finding, this points very clearly to Nevzat. Unfortunately we cannot know the mental world of a killer. With what motive he killed, we cannot understand without his confession. At the first session we did not ask Nevzat questions in the style of “Did you ever touch Narin?” for nothing. But for the moment we must suffice with the existing evidence. Look, Nevzat takes the child to the stream bed; after burying the child, he goes as if relieved and buys cheese, drinks tea, eats food. Now, what are we to think? With shame I say this of Arif, with embarrassment I say it: what does this make us think? It is a possibility — look, a possibility — it shows his relaxation after sexual abuse. Do we not see this? The forensic report says that no sexual finding was encountered — that is, it does not say “there is no sexual finding.” No one can understand the dark mental world of Nevzat. He may have committed this murder both to take revenge and to satisfy his urges. Unfortunately his subsequent actions show this. If Narin was subjected to sexual abuse, the usual suspect is directly Nevzat. Directly. To understand the inner world of a pedophile patient, I am submitting to your esteemed court a very detailed foreign article which I translated. In one part of the article it is stated: a pedophile is an individual who fantasizes about prepubertal children — usually under the age of 13 — who is sexually aroused by them, who feels sexual urges toward them. Pedophiles are seriously disturbed by these sexual urges, experience interpersonal difficulties, or act on these urges. Recent research shows that persons with pedophilia generally experience feelings such as inferiority, isolation or loneliness, low self-esteem, internal dysphoria and emotional immaturity. This conjures up a certain person for us, Presiding Judge.
DNA Findings in Salim’s Vehicle and the Misleading Perceptions
Now we come to the DNA matter. The DNA samples taken from the pink T-shirt, the black T-shirt and the child’s blanket belonging to Narin were compared with the DNA samples from the vehicle our client actually used. According to the report based on the swabs and stains taken from the Van Kriminal, it is stated that on the seat of the left front seat of the vehicle with the plate 47 XX 388 there is a trace amount of mixed swab DNA finding belonging to Narin. We requested a supplementary report as to what type of DNA this mixed swab said to be on the vehicle seat cover is — whether it is vomit, saliva, slobber, sweat or urine, or whether it is bile fluid, cadaveric fluid — and, if technically possible, we requested that it be asked of the Forensic Medicine Specialty Board whether this smeared swab was smeared on while Narin was alive or whether it fell from and was smeared by her body after death. It appears that your esteemed panel, because the swab found was present in trace amounts, was of the opinion that it is not possible to determine what type of DNA it is, and rejected our request. Now, the biggest, most dreadful perception against Salim in this file is also the DNA matter. Everyone remembers very well: anchors on live broadcasts, with full-filled mouths, with crocodile tears running from their eyes, made news saying that on the steering wheel part of the uncle’s vehicle vomit had been found, cadaveric fluid had been found, or that “Narin’s feces” had been found in the vehicle. But in the end, it turned out that this too was a lie. The report was in your hands. The perception that only Narin’s DNA was found in Salim’s vehicle is also a total lie. According to the Van Kriminal report dated September 6, as to whether some persons’ DNA is consistent with the swabs in the vehicle, the DNAs of Muhammed Kaya, Devran Güran, Salim Güran and Kurtuluş Güran also come out of the vehicle Salim used. Now it is also being said: why does Narin’s DNA come out of the driver’s seat? I also ask: if Salim always used this vehicle, why does Salim’s DNA come out of the right front seat, the back and seat-cushion parts, and not from the driver’s part?
The Location of the DNA in the Vehicle and the Contradictions of the Other Evidence
Why, if the blanket Nevzat claims is in the front right-seat area, does Narin’s DNA not come out there but rather on the left side? Moreover, DNA samples of Arif’s other children were not taken for comparison. For example, while going to work, our client would sometimes drop off Osman Güran at the main road. Or Eren — Eren also rode in the car. Why were comparisons of their DNA not made? Also, no DNA residues of Salim’s own other children came out of Salim’s vehicle. If samples from Salim’s children and his wife had not been sent to Forensic Medicine for comparison, or for instance if DNA samples of Arif’s and Salim’s children had been taken for comparison — those children constantly played in the car — those too would have come out. That is, not only Narin’s; those of the other children would have come out as well. At the previous session we asked Yüksel, Arif and many witnesses whether Narin had previously ridden in uncle Salim’s vehicle. Everyone confirmed that Narin had previously ridden in that vehicle. Moreover, Narin rode in it for the engagement on July 16; this is very clear. Now we are talking about the uncle. We are not talking about 7 strangers 7 villages away. The vehicle belonging to Fuat but used by Salim in recent times — when it is parked in front of the door, it becomes a sort of play area for the children. The report in the file stating that some doors of Salim’s vehicle were not locked is in the file. Also, according to the glass report dated October 9, the right front window of the vehicle Salim used does not open. This also contradicts Nevzat’s statements that “the cars drew up and I took the body from Salim’s right window.” Another interesting matter: after September 8, when Narin’s lifeless body was found, the vehicle was sent to Van for re-examination of the DNA residues, with its windows open. According to the Van Kriminal report dated September 12, from the hair samples on the inner part of the right rear door, it was determined that they are consistent with the DNA profiles obtained from the stain samples taken from Narin’s clothing and blankets earlier. Do you know what it means for more than one DNA to come out in different places? It means that either Narin, while alive, walked and played inside the vehicle, or rode in it at different times from different places, or that her relatives, who had contact with Narin, had ridden in that vehicle. That is, Narin rode in it while alive. That is very clear, very plain.
The Absurdity of the Second Scenario and the Role of the Family
Let us return: Salim persuades Nevzat to carry Narin, threatens him, offers him money. Nevzat is afraid, cowers, accepts. He takes the body and takes it away. Yüksel just watches after them, crying. Now let us look at the second scenario: Enes, while doing something with someone he should not be seen with or with an animal, is caught by Narin as a witness, and strangles Narin on the spot. This story is absurd, Presiding Judge. Salim is waiting ready there, or someone tips him off with smoke signals. He immediately takes over the incident, starts organizing. Organizations are to be asked of Muhtar Salim. He calls Nevzat. Nevzat is again threatened, persuaded; Nevzat is afraid, Nevzat cowers, Nevzat is a poor man, a worker, a laborer, a villager, etc. Nevzat — Nevzat puts the child in a sack and takes her to the stream bed. By the way, let us not get angry or enraged at his confession on November 7 that he threw the child from the barn window from a height of 3 meters savagely. Look — but here no one asks this: your own son is going to kill your own daughter; I am going to take the initiative; I am going to become an accomplice; and as if that were not enough, instead of taking her myself, I am going to share my sin with a stranger I have not spoken with in 3 months. Meanwhile I am not consulting Arif at all; no one is calling him on this matter. How absurd. Your own son is going to kill your own daughter; am I not going to inform you? Would you not say to me, “Man, at least let my daughter have a grave. Was my daughter an animal so that you buried her in a stream bed?” “I risk aggravated life imprisonment for Enes, forgetting the future of dozens of my children. For what? For one of my many nephews? For what? For a nephew who killed Narin, so many detained women and men and children and everyone else sacrifices themselves for Enes. Despite torture they do not confess. For what? For Enes, for Salim.” But I would tell on my father. If I saw pincers — Nevzat — how could Salim know that on that day he had taken his son’s vehicle and brought it to the village, that his vehicle had been brought to the village? This question is also very critical. We had already asked him himself. Now, is there no sensible person among you for the love of God to put an end to this theater? I am not making up these scenarios. Do not get me wrong; these are things made up by certain so-called sages, unprincipled and mindless, and imposed on society 24/7.
Lack of Communication at the Time of the Murder and Evidence of Bill Payment
No one asks this: if Enes killed her, why does Salim not call Arif at the exact hour of the murder? “Brother, what shall we do, what shall we say? Such an event has happened.” Now let us come to the most ridiculous part, which is the common point of both scenarios. Our hero Hercules Salim, while all this is happening to him, makes two bill payments via mobile banking. At 15:19 and 15:28 on September 11. Although the preliminary examination report is in the file, we submitted it to the esteemed court via UYAP again on December 15. We are proud and honored to be members of the Diyarbakır Bar; let us state this from the outset. The institution to which we are affiliated is very distinguished. The fact that the former bar president, the esteemed Nahit Eren, mentioned us in most of his defenses, that we have propagated into his defenses, honored and gratified us. However, the esteemed Nahit Eren accused us on social media of discussing evidence. “If you are discussing evidence, I will build all my defenses on you,” he engaged in this effort. He is much older than us, our respect for him is boundless, but Mr. Nahit is forgetting this: what inflamed this case, what took it out of its course, is entirely social media and the dreadful perceptions on social media. Nearly all the questions the law enforcement asked in the investigation are slanders thrown on social media. For instance, the fuel-station keeper; for instance, the lie that vomit was found on the steering wheel. Without fear or hesitation, without a desire for fame or reputation, with our names on display, we entered Twitter in order to correct the false perceptions on social media. With what we defended and with the evidence we presented, we were at least able to make some people of conscience say, “It could also be Nevzat; look, have you seen it? They have misled us.” If we had wanted to be famous, we would have appeared on live broadcasts like some did; we would have shown our faces. It is very easy, very easy to defend what everyone defends. We entered this path in spite of everyone, despite so many insults, threats and suggestions. If this is something measurable in money, forgive me — we forgot what we ate, what we drank, what we earned. We undertook something with all our effort, taking Arif’s pain as our own pain. Nahit is talking in more than half of his defenses about us and about the evidence we have found, trying to refute them. I say it again: I was honored and proud of this.
The Pedometer Evidence and the Reliability of the Experts
But we will no longer mention him from this stage onward, because we do not think that he has made a contribution to the file for the emergence of material truth either. That is, it is meaningless for us to make a statement on the basis of Nahit Eren’s defenses. Since he has not put forward any additional material evidence in the file. Now they are saying: if the child is dead, it could be that the children paid by mobile, or there may be automatic payment. To prove this is very easy, very simple. Let an official letter be written to the relevant banks, let it be asked. Whatever the result, we accept it. Because banks have the habit of recording log-in and log-out activity and paired devices. Instead of trying to refute this with so much GPS, with base stations, please — I say “I throw down the gauntlet.” If there is nothing you are afraid of, let an official letter be written to the bank. I demand it. I stand behind my evidence. Now let us talk a little about the pedometer. Esteemed Presiding Judge, by the record kept on December 18 at our request, it was proved that Salim took only 45 steps. Now I ask everyone sincerely: put your hand on your conscience. If the number had turned out to be 145 instead of 45, would not everyone now have declared “The killer is Salim”? Would they not now be shouting at the top of their voices: “Law. Onur Akdağ has, with his own hands, declared his client a killer”? Would no one discuss or say this was wrong? Friends, this is a matter of effort, belief and courage. I may be inexperienced, ignorant, or inadequate compared to my colleagues here. All of them are worthy of the highest respect. But admit that I am very brave. If I believe in something, I go after it. I believed in my client; I believed in this case. For example, if 145 had come out, “No, no, the pedometer has a margin of error”; “if the pedometer is correct, the earlier hours and the later hours would not be so contradictory with the events alleged to have occurred” — would some not have been distorting things like that? Salim is shopping in Diyarbakır with his wife and daughters while his sons Miras and Yusuf are sitting at a coffeehouse. Did we not already know this from the statements? Why do you distort it? “No — in the field between 19:00 and 20:00 why did he take so many steps today but not at other hours?” The real question is not these, friends. The real question is: does this app have a margin of error or not? Why is there not a demand to subject this to a test as well?
Emphasizing the Importance of the Pedometer and Its Contradiction with the Base-Station Report
Let us then have a technical report on the pedometer. Now, rather than personalizing the matter, when there is such a clear piece of evidence before us, and all our aim is only the emergence of material truth, why are you trying to belittle it? In this case we must stand in the same place. Are we not in the same place? “Look, look, Onur has found this piece of evidence; how come we could not see it? Let us see whether it can truly lead us to the truth by subjecting it to a scientific method” — instead of desiring this, why are you rumpling it up and throwing it out jointly with the prosecutor and the bar association? Even if the truth disturbs some, we are after it, after it. Otherwise, we too could have merely touched on the contradictions among the statements, spread our defense, nodded our heads and moved on. According to the base-station report, for Salim to leave his own house, enter Arif’s house, enter the outbuilding, and walk around the barn, he needs to take at least — look, at least — 400 steps. If we had not requested the pedometer to be examined, everyone would have viewed the base-station report as definitive, indisputable, not to be discussed. Let us evaluate the movement in the base-station report together in a very optimistic way. Salim at 14:55 — if we assume that between 14:55 and 15:18 he stood like a post on the road between his own house and Arif’s house (let him stand like a post, so his earlier steps are all covered, and let him stand like a post there). At 15:20 he is at the door of the house — look, we are taking the closest distance to Arif — 20 more steps, he is at the door of Arif’s house. Between 15:20 and 15:22 he goes to the barn and comes back. The minimum round trip is 120 steps. Then at 15:22 he enters the house. Between 15:22 and 15:32 he continues to be actively present inside Arif’s house and in the other rooms. According to the scenario, does he take another 50 steps inside the house? Let us say 50 steps. Around 15:36 Salim goes again through the back door of the barn. From his exit from the house to his entry behind the barn, let it be 70 steps; round trip, another 140 steps. Because the same report shows Salim again inside Arif’s house. At 15:41 he goes again from the house to the back part of the barn. Another 60 steps. At 15:42 it is alleged that he is on the road between Arif’s and his own house. Another 80 steps. At 15:43 again he is in front of Arif’s house; taking the minimum, as we said at the start, another 20 steps. The base-station report shows Salim at 15:52 again inside Arif’s house. Let that be another 10 steps.
The Accuracy of the Pedometer, Scientific Articles, and the Refutation of the Scenarios
Now, Presiding Judge, we have opened a very great breach here. When this pedometer matter began to be talked about, everyone started saying, “No one is saying Salim killed her anyway. But Enes killed her, and Salim organized.” Now, I am not Enes’s counsel, but let me state: with his pardon, when we pull Salim out of this matter, does this file not collapse onto Nevzat in a heap with all its sin? Because if we say “Enes killed her,” then will they not ask, “Who called Nevzat?” That is, if Salim was the organizer, Enes was the killer, Salim organized, and Nevzat buried her — who called Nevzat, who threatened him, who persuaded him? They have stood up and said, “The data of the pedometer app can be deleted hour by hour.” I too say “I throw down the gauntlet.” Through an expert, let it be examined whether there is deletion in the pedometer application, or whether it can be done or not; let it certainly be looked at. In our research — we did our research — it is not possible, in the app on Salim’s phone, to delete data hour by hour. The app on the phone is MiHealth.apk. In this app you can only delete data belonging to a specific date. Hour-by-hour deletion is not possible. Now let us look a bit at whether this pedometer app has a margin of error. We obtained very comprehensive, excellent articles on this, scientific articles. 103 persons, over 3 weeks, each for 1 week, using 3 different pedometer trials with both devices at the same time; the study shows that the app overestimates the daily average of about 8,500 steps by approximately 500 steps. That means it measures 6% more steps. Looking at all the articles on this, the most — the most — margin of error is 7%. And that is on the upside, not downside. I am submitting the articles on this to the court. Thank you for your patience, sir.
The Legal Evidentiary Value of the Pedometer: The Vander Heyden Example
Now I will tell you about a case involving a pedometer with many angles. This is the story of a mother from Wisconsin, Vander Heyden. The summary: Heyden lives with her boyfriend and they have small children. They go to a bar, argue. The man goes back home and the woman stays at the bar. The next day the woman is found dead on open ground. Her boyfriend is a suspect. Because a strand of the woman’s hair was also found on the car’s wheel, the man is convicted. Later, the man’s friends investigate. It turns out that, after the boyfriend left, the woman, angry with him, met with a man at the bar and brought that man to the canal bank. At first this man does not accept the accusations. The woman’s friends say that they had argued and that he killed the woman. Later, during this time, it is understood that the woman’s boyfriend took only 12 steps. That is, it is understood that, as he stated, the boyfriend was at home and was sleeping. We submit to the esteemed court a very good foreign decision regarding this and on why the pedometer carries evidentiary value in law.
Salim’s Pedometer Data and the Critical Time Interval
Yes, Salim Güran took a total of 11,206 steps, walked 6 kilometers, burned 471 calories. This activity took place in 2 hours 21 minutes. Now everyone is hung up on this: “Did he walk 2 hours 21 minutes in a 24-hour period?” 2 hours 21 minutes is a duration that runs each time a step is taken. For example, while sleeping, while resting, it is not active. We want to show some examples regarding the same app, Presiding Judge. We must show how proportionate the number of steps taken is to the time spent. Now, Presiding Judge, I have this app on my phone too. There is no difference at all. A figure very similar to the steps Salim took: 11,624. I took steps for 2 hours 13 minutes. We gradually reduce: 11,624, 2 hours 13 minutes; 9,589 steps, 1 hour 53 minutes; 8,679 steps, 1 hour 37 minutes. Look — do you see the ratio? How regular and proportional the decrease is. Again, we took 7,226 steps in 1 hour 28 minutes. Now we wondered: how many steps did we take on August 21? In total we took 7,185 steps. In 1 hour 20 minutes. And in the critical time, between 15:00 and 16:00, we took 26 steps. So we are not killers either, Presiding Judge; we are not killers either.
Comparison of Salim’s and Nevzat’s Internet Usage
Now I am talking about Nevzat and Salim’s internet usage history. Looking at the documents sent from the BTK for Salim and Nevzat, we examined the internet-use data history. We examined the comparison of their movements. Salim Güran, exactly at the critical minutes — that is, between 15:10 and 15:40 — at times enters the internet intensively, downloads data. Indeed the intensity at 15:28 is an indicator that he is making a payment via mobile banking. Salim’s internet log for these minutes is exactly 16 pages. Nevzat’s is only 3 pages. In the same minutes, there is virtually nothing in Nevzat Bahtiyar’s internet movement. Due to background apps running on his phone, there is limited data download. That is, he is not going online. Why? Because the man’s hands are full. Because, unfortunately, he is busy committing a murder. Because he is busy finding Narin and taking her to the stream bed. By the way, do not say “Nevzat is poor, his internet package is small.” We asked yesterday — in the later hours Nevzat breaks records in internet usage, breaks records. Now yesterday there was a perception-shaping that Salim’s internet usage between 15:10 and 15:40 was almost nothing compared to his usage at other hours. But the truth is something else. As we put forward this material truth, we are not only talking about Salim’s internet data history. The comparison of Nevzat’s and Salim’s data usage also means something. Yesterday, by talking only about Salim’s internet usage, perception was created. Let us briefly evaluate Salim’s and Nevzat’s internet. First we look at Salim. From 15:14 to 15:25 there is intensive internet usage. Especially at 15:25:08 Salim records record internet expenditure. At 15:26 again serious internet usage; at 15:27:43 extremely heavy usage. From 15:28:54 to 15:33:43 again serious internet usage. At 15:33:53 intense data flow continues. 15:36 and 15:41 are minutes of heavy internet access by Salim. If we look at Nevzat: at 15:10:24 he is on the internet. After this second, until 15:15:30 his internet is equivalent to that of a dead person — dead. Even his background apps have fallen silent. Between 15:15 and 15:20 there are data flows, but not noteworthy flows. They resemble the data used by background applications. At 15:26:09 seconds, for about 09 seconds, again like a dead person. From those minutes until 16:01 his internet is practically asleep. At 16:01 there is an internet concentration, and then it shuts down again. Now, clearly and intensively, Nevzat uses the internet at airplane speed between 17:06 and 17:49. That is, from 17:06 to 17:49 he uses the internet at airplane speed. We will submit the internet data for that moment to the esteemed court again. Now let us also look a bit at the Google Maps matter, Presiding Judge. On the day and hour of the murder, in order to determine whether the movements alleged in Salim’s report occurred, whether Nevzat went up the hill, and whether there was an intersection between Salim and Nevzat exactly at the time of the murder, we requested an examination of the timeline in the Google Maps application on the phones of my client Salim Güran and of Nevzat Bahtiyar. But it was not accepted. If the location feature of the phone is open, GPS data can be stored in the system files inside the device. Salim’s location is always on, always. We request that the phones be sent to a technical expert for this purpose. Forensic experts can recover this data from the phone’s memory through special software. We want every kind of evidence. Now let me show you an example, Presiding Judge, from the Google timeline. We will see Nevzat like this, Salim like this — this is how we will see them. If we can see them — now, it would not do if we did not mention the National Criminal. It must be said that the National Criminal’s report is a complete fiasco. Your esteemed court made 4 requests of the National Criminal. 3 of these requests found their place in the report. Although they made the determination that on the lower road there was vehicle movement consistent with what Nevzat stated in his first and last statements, the friends — believing this too is far from reality — bring it out through Ruhi Kaya’s camera and the matter of the blue tractor and the white Fluence. God bless them. According to the National Criminal, Narin went up the path with her clothing elements and this can be followed. So, the experts who claim to have identified Narin — why can they not determine that Nevzat went up the hill or that Salim was calling out from the hilltop? In this case, how can they not identify Nevzat, who is twice Narin’s size? “Oh, you are right — because Nevzat is not even worth the fingernail of Narin’s great heart, not even the fingernail; that is why you cannot see him.” According to the National Criminal, Narin goes up the path in about 50 seconds. I claim that even an adult, even sprinting, would take 2 minutes to cover that road, that slope. That is why their determinations on this are also entirely groundless. Meanwhile, as if doing its PR work as though it had achieved something were not enough, the National Criminal’s chief has stood up and claimed that, with the “potato lines” matter, the Güran family threatened him. Where is your impartiality, sir? Here you go: he is sharing that post from his own account.
SIM Cards, International Institutions, and the Red-Vehicle Matter
Let me say this right away, Presiding Judge: are the 40–50 SIM cards that were taken to misdirect the gendarmerie now being used as a veiled threat against the National, which has duties? [Smiley face], yes, Presiding Judge.
Now we, with our own means, have sent the images to national and international institutions. In this respect we also request time from you, Presiding Judge. Now let us touch a bit on the red-colored Roma-vehicle matter. In the opinion, Salim’s voice recording is mentioned, in which two Roma individuals and the Roma red vehicle were seen. The prosecution claims that through this statement of the muhtar, the searches were directed toward Syrians. In addition, it is stated that by “red vehicle” Nevzat’s vehicle was being referred to, and that the suspicion was desired to be drawn toward Nevzat. Now if you wish, let us listen to the voice recording together. Look — with this voice recording it is clearly seen: Salim is relating whatever he is hearing from the villagers. Salim acts as a sort of reflector. Indeed he asks the one next to him, because he heard it from him, learned it from him. Let us listen to the sound, Presiding Judge.
The Çarıklı Searches and Salim’s Statements on the Time of Disappearance
Also, although it is said that some of the houses searched in Çarıklı are houses where Nevzat occasionally stayed, there is no evidence to this effect in the file. My client already explained this a moment ago. None of the houses searched have any connection, near or far. Also, in some voice recordings, Salim says at the outset that his daughter’s disappearance time was 15:30. We just listened a moment ago. Later he gradually pushes this hour forward and in the end gives it as around 17:00. Here too, likewise, Salim says whatever he hears. When he comes from the field to the village, according to the villagers’ statements, initially between 15:00 and 15:30 — he calls a gendarmerie officer and asks. In the village every head shouts a different voice; whoever saw the child at whatever time, they convey it to Salim. At the very least — if Salim indoctrinated Birsen to 17:40, then why does Salim, at the outset, on the very first day, tell Sergeant-Major Şakir that the child went missing between 15:00 and 15:30? “I am going to both threaten Birsen and also tell the gendarmerie the real time myself, from the start, if the cameras are examined”? How absurd! Finally, Presiding Judge, I will touch on one or two matters. We have 15–20 minutes left. If we come to the base-station report:
The Invalidity of the Narrowed Base-Station Report and Its Contradiction with the Voice Recordings
As to the narrowed base-station, we explained at the previous session that, scientifically and technically, pinpoint shots cannot be made, and that showing room-by-room, point-by-point in houses in inside each other is nothing but a fantasy. It is contained in the opinion that, in order to check Narin’s body, Salim went that night in his own vehicle to the Eğertutmaz stream. The make, color and model of the vehicle could not be identified on the camera; again, through the narrowed base-station record, it has been definitively determined that he was there. We all watched the footage from the farm cameras. The vehicle alleged to contain Salim is seen on the camera for the first time at 22:33. Between 22:48 and 22:55 it waits without ever turning off the ignition. At 22:56 it disappears from view in the direction it came from. Thank God, there happens to be a voice recorder on Salim’s own phone. Thank God, that night at 22:41 he makes a 23-second phone call with Hacı Kaya. Exactly in those minutes, the vehicle we see on the farm camera is making senseless maneuvers behind a tree. That is, the vehicle does not stop, and no one gets out of it. However, when we listen to the voice recording, we hear that Salim is walking and that there are people next to him. We estimate that he is in the village near the fountain. Salim is speaking Kurdish. He tells that they are searching with 300 people but cannot find the child. Also at 22:32 — this is also very important — with Kurtuluş Güran; at 23:01 also with Arif Güran — there are voice recordings; here too it is very clear that he is around the village, clear, Presiding Judge, clear. Now please let us listen to those voice recordings. First we listen to 22:41, Presiding Judge. That is, he is making senseless maneuvers behind a tree; it is alleged that he is at the place where Narin was. In the background there are voices of people calling, sounds of walking, and it is understood that Salim is walking. If we cannot understand from here, let us also look at 22:32, Presiding Judge. That is, what is the meaning of 22:32? He has only 1 minute for him to appear on the camera.
The Evidentiary Quality of the Voice Recordings and the Inconsistency in Nevzat’s Site-Showing
Look, Presiding Judge, we did not make up this evidence. We took this evidence from within the file. No one also helped us. We are only saying, only showing, what we see inside the file. That is, can we not all hear here that at 22:32 he is walking? Then, if I am at the Eğertutmaz stream, how does the voice from inside the village throw me to the Eğertutmaz stream? Also at 23:03 there are calls with Servet Dinç. In these calls there is also no vehicle sound from behind. There are sounds of crowds of people, and conversations take place while he is inside the village. Particularly the voice recording at 22:41 and the one at 22:32 clearly show us that Salim is in the village. We requested that this voice recording be enhanced, and we repeat our request. Now, how coldly Nevzat site-showed our little girl by the stream bed was watched by all of Turkey. In his site-showing, Nevzat reached the stream bed from the stabilized road where the vehicle was allegedly left in well over 5 minutes. 5 minutes to go, at least 5 minutes — as it is alleged — to place two stones on the child, another 5 minutes to come back; this act requires at least 15 minutes. In the darkness of night, despite so many gendarmerie personnel in the village, if we think that Salim went and, as if he himself had buried her, knew the point as a spot, even then, logically, the times do not hold. If we are not convinced by the sound, the times also do not hold. Look at how the gendarmerie officer who first found the body, Cazim Burak Gör, describes the place the body was found: “Pressed down with three separate stones and surrounded by bushes.” And “I can go and find this at night” — how astonishing! In short, when the camera footage, the base-station reports, and the voice recordings are compared, my client Salim, contrary to what is stated in the opinion, on the night of the day of the incident, does not go to the place where Narin was — does not go. According to the base-station report dated December 3, it is claimed that when the base-station study was carried out within the village, a signal was received from at least 22 base stations, and therefore that the findings are of a certainty that leaves no doubt. Now we ask: in that case, how do the base-station signals of a person who is inside the village go 2–3 kilometers outside the village?
The Contradictions of the Base-Station Report and the Impartiality of the Experts
Well, if you claim that you received signals from at least 22 base stations, how is it that Salim’s base-station data between 22:48 and 22:55 goes outside the village? The same report has located the client together with the other defendants room by room, point by point, inside Arif’s house, yet has placed the client at 22:47 in the area of the cornfield. Why are you not giving the exact coordinates? If the experts could not see the coordinates in the file, let us tell them. It is already written in the record dated September 9. Now, interestingly, at the end of the report dated December 3, there is this annotation: “Regarding the Narin Güran murder, no other piece of evidence was touched upon other than the HTS records in the file and Salim Güran’s first statement; no samples were taken from the statements; no record or report was taken regarding the camera footage. Only the data obtained as a result of the field work we carried out has been reported.” Why did you feel the need for this? Who asked you this? Do you have a doubt about yourself that you feel the need to state this? On September 13, when Salim’s first statement was taken, in the room we were about 12–13 people. One of the experts was in the prosecutor’s office; he was there until the end of the statement, staring fixedly at the client and at us. Unfortunately for us the stones have only now fallen into place. They slipped a banana peel into our minds. Presiding Judge, from this point on we do not believe in the impartiality of those appointed as experts. At least I made you laugh, Presiding Judge. We request that an expert be obtained from a university. It is alleged that, because Tavşantepe is on a hill, a signal was received from at least 22 base stations. Look, this map shows the base stations around Tavşantepe. All the base stations are gathered here. The closest base station to Tavşantepe is 3.7 km away, in the direction of Çarıklı. That is, the contradictions we have stated — the report in question — has been carried out by persons without competence in a mistaken, biased manner, by examining the information and documents in the file — and I specifically claim that, in the light of Nevzat’s statements, the base-station report has prepared a scenario; this is very clear, very plain. But a base-station overlap yields a result only if there is technical surveillance. Here there is not even technical surveillance. Narrowed base-station work can be possible with the method called triangulation, instantaneous technical surveillance.
Expert Qualifications and Refutation of the Base-Station Report Claims
In what area do the said experts have expertise? There are 16 regional expert boards, and their names are not on these persons’ expert lists. What are the qualifications and fields of expertise of those who prepared the report? We do not know any of these. Really — who are these people, truly who? At the first hearing we also said very clearly: in the primary report, it is said that Salim was around Arif’s residence between 18:38 and 18:59, and that around 18:57 he moved and was in the area of the cornfield in the direction of Uzunbahçe. However, our client passes in front of the school camera at around 18:55. So what does this mean? In a report that is supposedly unchanging, never mistaken, so indisputable that it would be absurd even to discuss — a breach is opened. A breach! A breach that will not hold a stitch! Just like the matter of the Eğertutmaz stream — you again take my client and throw him outside the village. Now in the report such a picture is drawn: it shows, it claims, that Tavşantepe is the place with the widest coverage area in Turkey. That is why we insist that your panel’s participation in the performance of a site inspection must take place in the preparation of the report. Actually, one does not even need to be an expert. In the village — never mind the internet — even the phone has no reception, no reception. Location information appears with a deviation of at least 200–300 meters. Meanwhile, it is necessary to ask this: according to the base-station reports, Nevzat Bahtiyar is on the paved road between Arif’s and Salim’s houses at 15:10. Well, to be on the paved road at these minutes, by when at the earliest must he have left the house? At the latest at 15:07. Then what are we going to say to Gazal Bahtiyar’s statement of September 18? Because Nevzat calls Salim on the pretext that the water has been cut, and that call lasts 42 seconds. That is, what does this mean? Let us look at Gazal Bahtiyar’s statement: “After Nevzat talked to Salim on the phone, he left the house. He told me he was going to water the trees. But I did not see him watering the trees. However, I saw Nevzat leave in the car. Because I too went outside with him and stood on the balcony. I saw from the balcony that his car went downward. The direction of his vehicle was toward the cemetery at the village exit.” Now, as a result, according to Gazal’s statement, until the call ended at 15:08 — and the base-station report also says so — Nevzat was at home. We say: why are these minutes not examined clearly?
Gazal Bahtiyar’s Statement and Criticism of the Double Standard
At 15:08:09, while he is talking with Salim, he is at home; during the 42-second call, he is also at home. As soon as the phone call ends, if he leaves his house at 15:09, only by flying can he be on the paved road on the upper road at 15:10. That is why a site inspection is important. That is why — now is this being claimed, or is it being believed: does Salim call Nevzat with this call? Then Narin has not yet gone up the path. Let us say for a moment that the base-station report is correct. Well, then why is Gazal Bahtiyar not detained? Because Gazal is lying. She is giving false statements. What is this protectionist instinct, this double standard applied to the Bahtiyars? Our esteemed prosecutor, in his opinion, because of the camera footage of September 4, filed a criminal complaint against Ahmet Akgün for intentional wounding, threat, harboring a criminal, destroying and concealing evidence of a crime. Our esteemed prosecutor knows how to file a complaint, especially when Ahmet Akgün has stood up on a live broadcast and said everything openly and sincerely. Then why are you not saying “I wonder” about Gazal Bahtiyar? Because of Ahmet Akgün — now, if Gazal Bahtiyar is telling the truth, the base-station report is trash; if the base-station report is correct, I am hereby reporting Gazal — please, let her be detained. Please let her be detained in the base-station report. In the base-station report there is also no data that Nevzat brought the child to the barn. The base-station report also refutes Nevzat’s statements. It draws for us an entirely different scenario. Had Nevzat not taken the child to the barn and placed her in a sack? In the supplementary base-station report it speaks of a deviation of 2 meters or 1 minute. In 1 minute I take 70 steps, that is about 50–55 meters. Yes, the confession has come from the supplementary report — is he unaware? It says in the narrowed base-station analysis there will be a deviation of at least 50 meters. Houses are already in one another, and we are still discussing the evidence, still. Presiding Judge, regarding narrowed-area base-station work, we are submitting to the file 4 technical guiding articles written in a foreign language, of which we have obtained translations. Not to waste time reading all of them, we have highlighted in yellow the places we mark in yellow. In places concerning cellular-data base-station analysis, it particularly explains, in scientific and technical terms, why a precise location analysis cannot be made, and in its annex in a table it states the narrowest area meter that can be given under the best conditions. That is 100 meters. If in a very busy city, many base stations exist, if there are no problems stemming from the telecommunication operators, etc.
The Unreliability of the Narrowed Base-Station Analysis and the Request for Release
Thank you, thank you, Presiding Judge. Now, with Wi-Fi technology there is a deviation of 50–75 meters; with Bluetooth technology there is a minimum deviation of 10 meters. All of these are articles written by an expert forensic-informatics company. They also mention judicial decisions from Denmark and the United States that were corrected after convictions were given based on erroneous base-station work. Again the articles say: to interpret the location information from the base station in the HTS narrowed base-station, writing alone is not enough; serious expertise is required. Moreover, beforehand, a method of mapping called a “forensic radio survey” is required. The control procedures called “drive testing” that must be carried out by going to the area where the base stations are located are required. That is, for example, you are going there to test; you are talking on your phone; let us say you spend a few hours; then let us see whether your narrowed base-station analysis will give the same location. In 2019 in Denmark, 10,000 judicial decisions were annulled because they were based on incorrect narrowed base-station work. That is, it is a method that is never, ever to be trusted. Especially when we are looking at houses so closely packed together in such a narrow area. Now everyone is speaking from the tip of their tongue. Please, let us spit out what is on our tongue. What is the narrowed base station, what is the National Criminal report telling us? Let everyone say who their killer is now, let us not shadowbox. Is the killer Salim, or is it Enes? We do not say “the killer is Nevzat” for nothing. We have brought out and presented many pieces of evidence; but what is being said to us? Anyone can be the killer, except Nevzat. In the opinion also, who the killer is and where the child was killed are not stated. The forbidden-love slander between Salim and Yüksel drew the arrows to Salim. “No, no, the Princess dog, no, an incestuous relationship” — they kept drawing the arrows to Enes. If we are going to give importance to the base-station report — if we are going to accept the base-station report for a moment — then the base-station report says Salim is inside Arif’s house at 15:22. Well, then what does this mean? First, Nevzat, when he was calling Salim because of the water matter, was not at home, because at 15:10 he was on the paved road between Arif’s and Salim’s houses. That is, Salim is not calling to him from the hilltop on the path. Nevzat goes up the path with a divine sign. At that time the child has not even turned toward the path yet. Secondly, Salim comes to the house after the child arrived home. Salim’s arrival at the house is at 15:22. That is — I will spit out what is on the tongue of the report — the slander against Yüksel and Salim has been refuted by the report. Great news to Ms. Yüksel. Arif’s house has two doors, an outer iron-white door, the iron ones, which can hardly be opened from outside; indeed on that day when Hediye came to the house, Eren himself opened the door to her. There is also an inner brown door. There are two doors in the house. There are also 3 children. Now what did I ask Enes at the first session? “Your uncle is going to do these things with your mother and, moreover, will savagely kill your sister; in this situation what would your reaction be toward Salim?” What did he tell me? We all heard. “If nothing is in my hand, at least I will grab a knife from the kitchen and tear him to pieces,” he said. Now let us look briefly at the scenario drawn in the base-station report. Salim leaves his own residence at 14:52, at 15:18 he is outside, near Arif’s house. Meanwhile, according to the scenario, 4 minutes have passed since the child went up the path. Salim also enters the house at 15:22. He says that between 15:22 and 15:26 he was in the empty room opposite the kitchen. Another situation: did we not see Nevzat at 15:40 taking the child to the stream bed? Did we not see it on the cameras? Look, the base-station report says about Nevzat: at 16:00 Narin Güran’s body is at the place where it was found. Yes, you are right — not believing in science is stupidity. “Counsel, you do not believe in science?” I say — I believe in science, but you think this report is scientific; your mistake is there, fellow townsman. Finally, in the same report, Nevzat Bahtiyar at 16:35 leaves the place where Narin Güran’s body is and comes to Tavşantepe. In Arif’s expression, “this Nevzo, this Nevzo” — at around those hours was he not at the house of his sister-in-law Zinet Dalar on the Gönenli side? Did we not see this from the statements and records? Yes, Presiding Judge, one of the most important decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on the principle that the defendant benefits from doubt is the Tafner v. Austria decision. In this decision, in summary, it has been stated that the local court and the courts of appeal convicted the defendant only on the basis of the police’s investigation report; that the court decided based on suspicious matters set out in the police’s investigation report; that the evidence shown as the basis for the conviction could not, as a definite and single result, constitute the defendant’s guilt; that despite this, the rendering of such a decision gives the impression that the judicial authorities are prejudiced regarding the defendant’s guilt; and that in this way Article 6/2 of the Convention has been violated. Now, in our event, if we think of the gendarmerie records, you can readily grasp the similarity. Presiding Judge, I thank you for your patience. Finally, regarding our client, my humble request from you is that you release our client and acquit him as a result. But if you cannot do this, I ask your esteemed court, your esteemed panel, that at least the decision you will give regarding our client be house arrest, and that this harm be remedied. I thank you very much.