Attempted lynching of Kılıçdaroğlu in Çubuk: Court announces its verdict
Following the appellate court's decision to overturn the initial ruling on procedural grounds, the Çubuk 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance has issued a new verdict regarding the attempted lynching of CHP's 7th Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. Sevim Gölyeri, who was heard shouting "Burn that house down" in front of the residence where Kılıçdaroğlu had taken refuge, was sentenced to a total of 5 years and 10 months in prison.
12punto
The Çubuk 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance has announced its verdict in the retrial concerning the attempted lynching of then-CHP Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu and his accompanying delegation, who were targeted while attending the funeral of Infantry Private Yener Kırıkçı—who lost his life in a PKK attack in Çukurca, Hakkari—in the village of Akkuzulu in Çubuk on Sunday, April 21, 2019, following the reversal decision by the 27th Penal Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Justice.
CHP's 7th Chairman Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, 27th Term Ankara Deputy Yıldırım Kaya, CHP Group Deputy Chairman Murat Emir, former CHP Group Deputy Chairman Levent Gök, and CHP Ankara Deputy Deniz Demir attended the trial at the Çubuk 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance, where 48 individuals were being tried.
The court sentenced defendants Ayhan Bedava, Ayşe Resimci, Büşra Kırık, Cahit Köse, Cihan Karahisar, Elif Gölyeri, Engin Horat, Eray Kuş, Güngör Aşık, Mehmet Küçük, Metin Aslan, Mustafa Amir, Mustafa Baş, Mutlu Bedava, Salih Ateş Yürekli, Salih Azder, Salih Çataltepe, Sami Şekerci, Hasan Durut, Hüseyin Aydın, Yakup Karakoç, Yakup Karakoç, Yunus Cansız, Abdullah Gündoğdu, Hüseyin Keskin, Hüseyin Üzüm, Nuh Resimci, Ramazan Değirmenci, and Ramazan Onbaşı to 3 years and 4 months in prison each for the crime of "Deprivation of Liberty."
Defendants Gurbet Sarıyer, Sevim Gölyeri, Mustafa Gülebakan, and Osman Kılıç were each sentenced to 3 years and 4 months in prison for "Deprivation of Liberty" and 2 years and 6 months for "Publicly inciting to commit a crime," totaling 5 years and 10 months in prison each.
The 20-month and 18-day prison sentence given to defendant Engin Yüce was suspended on the grounds that "the court formed a positive opinion that the defendant would not commit another crime, based on the defendant's personality, social and economic status, the characteristics of the crime, and the remorse shown during the trial process." Defendants Cevdet Sarıtaş and Halis Daştan were sentenced to 5 years and 5 months in prison for "Deprivation of Liberty by Use of Force and Threat." Defendants Koray Demirel, Gazi Aksoy, Fahrettin Abacı, and Niyazi Altuntaş were each sentenced to 5 years in prison for "Deprivation of Liberty by Use of Force and Threat."
Defendant Vahit Delibaş was sentenced to a total of 7 years and 15 days in prison, consisting of 1 year, 5 months, and 15 days for "Insulting a Public Official Due to Their Duty," 5 years for "Deprivation of Liberty by Use of Force and Threat," and 7 months and 15 days for "Simple Assault against a Public Official."
The 7-month and 15-day prison sentence given to defendant Mustafa Ayaz for "Simple Assault against a Public Official" was suspended. Defendant Halil İbrahim Topçu was sentenced to a total of 4 years, 4 months, and 15 days in prison, consisting of 1 year and 15 months for "Insulting a Public Official Due to Their Duty" and 3 years and 4 months for "Deprivation of Liberty."
ONE PERSON ACQUITTED
The prison sentences handed down to the children involved in the crime, B.S., M.Y., N.K., and Y.G., were suspended. The only defendant acquitted in the case was Ayhan Onbaşı. Since the 2.5-year prison sentence given to Osman Sarıgün, who punched Kılıçdaroğlu, for "incitement to commit a crime" had already been finalized, Sarıgün and a total of 20 other defendants were not retried in the case that was overturned on procedural grounds and subsequently reheard.
Evaluating the decision, lawyer Celal Çelik said, "We will take this decision to the Court of Appeal. Because from the very beginning, we demanded that the trial be held in the High Criminal Court. Since there were actions that fell under the scope of 'attempted murder,' the Criminal Court of First Instance cannot conduct this trial."