Those police officers and the night watchman have been released

Müyesser YILDIZ - 12punto

With the acceptance of the indictment prepared on November 14 regarding the incident, one of the defendants, police officer T. S. Ö., was released, while it was decided that the other defendants, commissioner S.A. and night watchman A.Ş., would remain in custody.

BECAUSE THE INCIDENT WAS REFLECTED IN THE PRESS

In the indictment, it was stated that a decision of non-prosecution was made regarding the accusation of “sexual assault by molestation” against the defendants, while it was requested that the parties, who were accepted as “complainant-suspects,” be punished for the charges of “damaging property, simple assault, public insult, and armed threat.” Additionally, commissioner S.A. was faced with charges of “armed resistance to prevent the performance of duty, possession of an unlicensed weapon, and sexual harassment.” On the other hand, it was noted that the reasons for the defendants' arrest included the finding that “the incident was reflected in the press, and it was concluded that this was of a nature to damage the sense of trust in the police and the state in the public eye.”

"THEY WERE MORE INTOXICATED THAN WE WERE"

The first hearing of the case, held today at the Ankara 17th Criminal Court of First Instance, was attended by the detained defendants S.A. and A.Ş., as well as T.S.Ö., who was released last month, and some of the complainant-suspect women and their lawyers.

In his defense, detained defendant and night watchman A.Ş. explained that while they were sitting in the car, women standing on the sidewalk asked, “Do you have a cigarette?” and that he, caught off guard, replied, “I have one.” He stated that upon this, one of them hit him in the eye with a bag through the open window and insulted him, and then the others began to insult and curse. Stating that the commissioner S.A., who was driving the car, moved the vehicle, and when they stopped and got out after a while, the women came and started hitting them, and that when the crowd grew, S.A. fired into the air, A.Ş. said, “It is out of the question for me to sexually harass or insult anyone. I am a civil servant, I know the laws. I would not do such a disgraceful thing. I am filing a complaint against them.”

Commissioner S.A. noted that he was assigned to another province, had come to Ankara for his annual leave, met with his friends and consumed alcohol, and that after the issue of cigarettes came up with a group of men and women walking on the sidewalk while they were sitting in the car, A.Ş. was hit in the eye with a bag, and said the following:

“We moved. When A.Ş.'s eye started bleeding, we stopped and got out. They followed us. They were more intoxicated than we were; they cursed. The venue owners from Sakarya also came. While one was shouting, 'Isn't there a knife?', another came up to me and said, 'Go away, they are bringing a knife,' so I slapped him. When the men arrived, I fired four shots into the air. I did not use the weapon as a threat. It is also in the footage; my back was turned to the women. I had no action directed at them. One person came and took my weapon from my waist; I chased him. Later, at the police station, I saw my weapon in the waist of police officer Y. M. I worked in the Çankaya plainclothes units for two years. Stating that it was stolen, I asked who he took it from and whether he had kept a report. When he said he didn't know who he took it from, I asked for the weapon, saying, 'Let me have given it to you of my own free will.' When he didn't give it, I pulled it and took it, then gave it back. I think he filed a complaint against me to cover up the mistake of not keeping a report of the theft. Also, the women's children were not at the scene. It is understood from the footage that they came later. I am filing a complaint against them for damaging my car and cursing.”

Defendant T.S.Ö., who is being tried without arrest, also explained that he had been a police officer for 15 years, that he was sleeping in the front of the car during the incident, that he woke up when A.Ş. said, “My eye is very bad,” that while he was trying to calm the women down, one of them came from behind and started hitting him with her bag, that he pushed her away, that the women's attacks continued even while being taken to the police station, and that he did not have his weapon with him that day.

"ARE YOU HITTING ON ME OR HER?"

Complainant-suspect S.S., who is alleged to have hit defendant A.Ş. with a bag, stated that the events started after Ç.D. was catcalled and bad words were said, but that she did not remember hitting him with a bag. Upon this, the lawyer for defendant S.A. asked, “Why would he hit on her and not you?” pointing out that according to the footage, Ç.D. was quite far from the car, while S.S. was the closest. Pointing to Ç.D., S.S. replied, “I am 1.50 meters tall. Are you hitting on me or the person across from me?”

When the Magistrate Judge asked if she wanted the announcement of the verdict to be deferred, S.S. stated that she did not want it. Upon her lawyer's warning, she said, “I don't know. How should I know? The paper in my hand...”

Complainant-suspect H.B., on the other hand, laughed and said that her previous statements were valid, to which the Judge warned, “There is nothing to laugh about.”

The other complainant-suspect K.B. also said, “They said they were police in a different way. I also hit with the bag. I am filing a complaint.”

The lawyer for defendant A.Ş. criticized the indictment by pointing out that joint perpetration cannot be the case in spontaneously developing events:

“Because the prosecutor could not understand who hit whom and who insulted whom, he evaluated joint perpetration for the defendants and individual crime for the others. Joint perpetration is difficult in verbal crimes. An indictment has been prepared as if they were cursing in an orchestra.”

"THE ONE WHO CALLS THE JUDGE 'YOU' WHILE SOBER"

The lawyer for defendant S.A. also claimed that the complainant-suspects intentionally reflected certain parts of the incident to the media and said the following:

“A social pressure was created as if these events were carried out by the law enforcement on duty. With this excitement, unlawful actions were taken. The prosecutor reflected the claims of the complainants as if they were an expert report. However, the single-audio footage does not include the curses they served to the media and are alleged here. Right or wrong; it is clear that the first physical attack was made by S.S. Then the second complainant Ç.D. also attacks with her bag. Moreover, the statements of the complainants at the police station are contradictory. Indeed, S.S. addressed the Judge as 'you' even while sober. It is not difficult to guess what someone under the [influence] of 2.5 promille alcohol would say. What is called an unlicensed weapon is not S.A.'s service weapon, but his second weapon. It is written on its document that 'It continues during the term of duty.' Therefore, it cannot be claimed to be unlicensed. Also, there are no two children at the scene; they come later. They don't even have statements, and they are not here today. Because children tell the simplest truth.”

While the lawyer for the complainant-suspect women stated that he had just been informed of the file today and therefore would make his defense later, the lawyer for one of the children alleged to be at the scene requested that the defendants remain in custody on the grounds that the police did not listen to the child, that their complaints continue, and that they could exert pressure on the child.

Upon this, the court's prosecutor asked why the child was not listened to. The lawyer said, “I don't know because I just received the file.”

After the statements were completed, the Prosecutor gave an opinion in the direction of the release of commissioner S.A. and night watchman A.Ş., “taking into account the way the incident occurred, witness and victim statements, the state of evidence, and the state of detention.”

While the Judge decided to release the defendants and not to apply judicial control to them, he also announced that a defendant-based narrative report would be requested from an expert. While the Judge issued a warrant to bring the two victims who did not come to the hearing by force, he also warned the complainant-suspect women regarding the child, saying, “Let there be no forced bringing because he goes to school. Have him ready at the next hearing.”

News Source: Müyesser Yıldız