Attorney Rezan Epözdemir's prosecutor's office statement revealed: The fruit of the poisonous tree is also poisonous

Attorney Rezan Epözdemir, who was detained on charges of "Giving a bribe," "Political-military espionage," and "Aiding FETÖ/PDY" as part of two separate investigations conducted by the Istanbul Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office, was referred to the courthouse following a health check.

Epözdemir, whose statement was taken at the prosecutor's office under the "Bribery" investigation, gave a 6-page statement. It was learned that Epözdemir's statement under the "Terror" investigation is still ongoing.

PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE STATEMENT REVEALED

The statement given by Rezan Epözdemir under the "bribery" investigation has come to light. In her statement, Epözdemir said: "The file must be sent to the HSK and documents of value must be returned to us.

Documents falling within the scope of the file that relate to private life must be destroyed. The Istanbul Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office, which has no investigative authority, therefore also has no authority to collect evidence.

For this reason, all evidence obtained within the scope of the investigative proceedings conducted by the Istanbul Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office is unlawful pursuant to the principle that 'the fruit of the poisonous tree is also poisonous.' It cannot be used as evidence," she said.

HERE ARE THE QUESTIONS PUT TO EPÖZDEMİR AND HER ANSWERS:

Question 1: She was asked whether she knows a person named Cengiz Çallı, and from which years and how frequently they have met:

A person named Cengiz ÇALLI was serving as a Republic Prosecutor at the Gaziosmanpaşa Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office in 2007. I was also the Istanbul Bar Association's representative in the same district during the same period. Our acquaintance began there. In addition, I have held Cengiz's power of attorney since 2020. I am submitting a copy of these powers of attorney to the file. I do not recall going on vacation or dining outside of work hours with the person named Cengiz ÇALLI. I have not submitted a power of attorney in any file in which Cengiz ÇALLI was the investigating prosecutor. After April 2021, I did not visit Cengiz ÇALLI at his office because my workload became very heavy. However, prior to that date, when I went to the courthouse, I would visit him due to our long-standing acquaintance. Furthermore, going on vacation together or dining together is not a legal issue if there is no file relationship between the parties.

Question 2: She was asked whether she knows a person named Atalay Demirbaş, and from which years and how frequently they have met:

I met the person named Atalay DEMİRBAŞ through a mutual friend at a time whose exact date I cannot now recall. In 2018, the person named Atalay DEMİRBAŞ gave me a power of attorney to follow up on his files. I handled the files of a company called Demand, owned by Atalay, in the administrative courts. After learning that this man was a fraudster, I resigned from representing him. I am also submitting a copy of this power of attorney to the file. As can be seen from Atalay DEMİRBAŞ's criminal record, he is a fraudster. He is also being tried on bribery charges in a case currently before the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation. Furthermore, Atalay has been demanding money from me via foreign numbers for approximately 5 years, threatening to frame me with a false accusation if I do not pay.

I will submit the records relating to these matters to this file at a later date. The complaint I filed in this regard is with the Istanbul Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office Bureau for the Investigation of Crimes with Unknown Perpetrators. I will submit the file number to the file at a later date. I will also file a complaint against him for the crimes of perjury and slander due to his statements in this file.

Question 3: She was asked whether she knows persons named Zekeriye Yurtçak, Ahmet Mesut Yurtçak, Kürşat Yılmaz, and Nurbari Erşahin, and from which years and how frequently they have met:

I do not know the persons named Zekeriya YURTÇAK, Ahmet Mesut YURTÇAK, or Nurbari ERŞAHİN. I have never seen them in my life. There has been no communication between us, neither face to face nor via mobile phone or any other means. The person named Kürşat YILMAZ was, as far as I recall, Cengiz ÇALLI's clerk. We have had no contact whatsoever. I would see him in Cengiz's room whenever I visited Cengiz at his office.

She was asked, due to a contradiction, about claims that WhatsApp message records between Rezan EPÖZDEMİR and the person named Kürşat YILMAZ exist in Kürşat YILMAZ's digital materials, that a signed jersey was gifted to Kürşat YILMAZ by Rezan EPÖZDEMİR, and that persons named Atalay DEMİRBAŞ and informant Zihni ÇAKIR allege that Kürşat YILMAZ was also used by Cengiz ÇALLI in his bribery acts to make contact with Rezan EPÖZDEMİR:

I do not recall establishing any contact with the person named Kürşat YILMAZ. Given that a great deal of time has passed since the events, it is also natural that I would not remember. I already stated above that Atalay is a fraudster. I also reject his statements in this regard. The person named Zihni ÇAKIR testified in favor of FETÖ frame-up files. As can be seen upon examination of the file numbered 2019/191 Esas of Istanbul 13th Heavy Criminal Court, he caused many people to be unjustly imprisoned and victimized. Furthermore, there are 3 compensation cases and 1 criminal case between myself and the person named Zihni ÇAKIR. For this reason, there is a legal enmity between us. He is framing me on the orders of those from whom he takes instructions. A prior tip-off inquiry was conducted regarding the allegations in the Terror file for which I am currently in detention. Subsequently, a SYOK decision was issued regarding this file. Zihni ÇAKIR filed a new tip-off by copying and pasting the same petition. There are only 2 days between the tip-off in this file and the tip-off in the Terror file. This situation reveals that it is a frame-up.

Question 4: It was read out and she was asked that, in the file known to the public as the "macaroni file" — specifically the Bakırköy Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office investigation file numbered 2021/2561, in which Cengiz Çallı was the investigating prosecutor — it has been established beyond doubt that a bribe was received in exchange for the release of the detained persons named (Zekeriye Yurtçak and Ahmet Mesut Yurtçak) and the subsequent lifting of the judicial supervision measures applied in the form of house arrest; and that in the WhatsApp correspondence dated 07.07.2021 relating to the receipt of the bribe, there are conversation records indicating that the initial bribe of 75,000 dollars would be delivered to a suspect named Rezan:

As can be understood from the documents I have submitted, in the Bakırköy Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office investigation file numbered 2021/2561, the YURTÇAK individuals and the other suspects were released on 15/06/2021. Atalay, in his statement, claimed that an agreement was reached for a bribe of 150,000 dollars within the scope of this file, with 75,000 dollars to be paid before the release and 75,000 dollars after the release. The WhatsApp messages you have shown me are dated 07/07/2021. According to Atalay's statement — which I categorically reject — I would have had to receive this money by 14/06/2021 at the latest. Therefore, the dates of the bribery allegation and the WhatsApp records do not match. I had lent money to Cengiz ÇALLI on 1 or 2 occasions at times whose exact dates I cannot now recall. As far as I remember, I gave one of these at the Sultangazi Halkbank branch. The branch manager Hüseyin MERCAN and a person named Veysi KARAMAN, who was a customer at the branch at the time, are witnesses to the fact that I lent money. I request that they be heard. Beyond that, I also recall that he once asked me for money saying he was going to buy a house. From June 2021 onwards, my workload became very heavy due to my election to the board of a sports club. From that date on, my communication with Cengiz ÇALLI was no longer as frequent as before. From that date on, I began asking Cengiz ÇALLI — either in person or by phone — to repay the money I had lent him, the amount and date of which I cannot now recall. As far as I remember, he had repaid part of it. However, I also do not remember how much he paid. Furthermore, if Cengiz ÇALLI received a bribe from this file, logically the money would have had to be delivered to him. Even if — which I do not accept — I had been an intermediary, the money would have had to be brought to me and then passed on to Cengiz through me.

However, the allegation in the file is that Cengiz took the money and brought it to me. This alone is sufficient to demonstrate that this is a creditor-debtor relationship. I do not know why my name appears in the correspondence dated 07/07/2021 that you have mentioned. I also do not know whether the person named Rezan in that correspondence is me. Even if the person in the correspondence is me, as I just mentioned, my name may appear in the correspondence because of the pressure I put on Cengiz to repay his debt. However, as I said, I have no knowledge of the money exchange between them. I do not know what that money was for. However, as can be understood from the documents I have submitted as an annex, when Atalay was asked about this matter in the file numbered 2022/154 Esas of Bakırköy 24th Heavy Criminal Court, he stated: "I had previously sold an apartment to Cengiz ÇALLI. I had also previously submitted the documents relating to the sale to the file. The figures in the messages between us relate to the amounts pertaining to that sale." He also made similar statements in the Magistrate's Criminal Court inquiry and in his file at the Court of Cassation regarding these same records. However, in this file, in order to obtain a benefit, he changed his statement, claiming that this money relates to the crime of bribery and that I was also involved, thereby framing me. I am submitting all the documents I have mentioned to the file. Furthermore, in the inquiries and statements I mentioned, Atalay also stated regarding Cengiz that Cengiz is a very honorable man, that he used Cengiz's name without Cengiz's knowledge, and that he never gave Cengiz a bribe. Moreover, this allegation has not been the subject of the case currently before the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation. The subject of the case before that criminal chamber is the trial concerning the flagrant offense relating to the suspects surnamed YURTÇAK in the Bakırköy Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office investigation file numbered 2021/2561 — specifically their initial release, followed by their re-detention and subsequent release under judicial supervision conditions.

Question 5: Atalay Demirbaş's statement regarding the WhatsApp records was read out and she was asked about it: "The person referred to as Rezan in this conversation is Rezan EPÖZDEMİR. Nurbari ERŞAHİN and the person named Zekeriya YURTÇAK were co-suspects in the macaroni file. The operation file was with Cengiz ÇALLI, who was serving as a prosecutor at Bakırköy Courthouse at the time. In the first operation conducted in the file, Nurbari was not arrested. Zekeriya, however, was arrested. Nurbari ERŞAHİN told me: 'You are on good terms with Cengiz Çallı and Rezan; talk to them so they can help us with the file.' Thereupon, I spoke with both Rezan and Cengiz ÇALLI. Cengiz and Rezan told me they could secure the release in exchange for a bribe of 150,000 dollars. I conveyed the situation to Nurbari ERŞAHİN." The 150,000-dollar bribe was brought to me by Nurbari ERŞAHİN, Zekeriya's unofficial partner, in exchange for Zekeriya's release. 75,000 dollars of this money was taken from my residence by Cengiz ÇALLI on 07/07/2021 — the date on which the WhatsApp records mentioning Rezan EPÖZDEMİR's name exist — or the day after. When Cengiz took the money, he said he was taking it to his office to give it to Rezan. However, after he left, he may also have met Rezan outside and given it to her there. I do not know where they met."

As can be understood from the documents I have submitted, in the Bakırköy Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office investigation file numbered 2021/2561, the YURTÇAK individuals and the other suspects were released on 15/06/2021. Atalay, in his statement, claimed that an agreement was reached for a bribe of 150,000 dollars within the scope of this file, with 75,000 dollars to be paid before the release and 75,000 dollars after the release. The WhatsApp messages you have shown me are dated 07/07/2021. According to Atalay's statement — which I categorically reject — I would have had to receive this money by 14/06/2021 at the latest. On 07/07/2021, the date of the WhatsApp message records you have shown me, these individuals were already being tried without arrest. These individuals were re-detained on 29/09/2021 — the date on which the flagrant offense that is also the subject of the trial before the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation occurred — within the scope of the same file. They were subsequently released under judicial supervision conditions. I do not recall whether I met with Cengiz ÇALLI on or around 07/07/2021, or, if I did meet him, whether Cengiz ÇALLI made any payment to me in relation to the debt I had previously given him. Nearly 5 years have already passed. It is also contrary to the normal course of life to expect me to remember.

Question 6: It was read out and she was asked that, in a study conducted by obtaining the HTS/base station records of the persons named Rezan EPÖZDEMİR and Cengiz ÇALLI for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of Atalay Demirbaş's allegations, it was determined that on 08/07/2021, Cengiz ÇALLI went to Atalay DEMİRBAŞ's residence as Atalay had alleged, and that on the same night he shared a common base station with Rezan EPÖZDEMİR:

As I just said, I do not recall whether I met with Cengiz ÇALLI on or around 07/07/2021. Even if I did meet him, I do not recall whether he made any payment to me in relation to the debt I had given him. Given that time has passed, it is also contrary to the normal course of life to expect me to remember. Moreover, since the individuals had already been released before this date and the second arrest also occurred in September of the same year, it is clear that this WhatsApp record does not relate to bribery.

Question 7: It was read out and she was asked that, in a search conducted at suspect Rezan Epözdemir's office located at Levent Mah. Lale Sok. Beşiktaş / İstanbul, 2 promissory notes were seized: one dated 01/04/2021 with a value of 1,560,000 TL, and the other dated 09/07/2021 with a value of 930,000 TL, with Cengiz ÇALLI as the debtor and Rezan EPÖZDEMİR as the creditor. Taking into account that, according to the base station records of Cengiz ÇALLI and suspect Rezan EPÖZDEMİR, they shared a common base station during the nighttime hours of 08/07/2021, the view has formed that the promissory note dated 09/07/2021 was drawn up during this meeting and that Rezan EPÖZDEMİR was given this note in exchange for the bribe money remaining with Cengiz ÇALLI, and her statement on this matter was requested:

At the outset of my statement, I also stated that I believe the investigation should be conducted by HSK inspectors pursuant to Article 86 of Law No. 2802. I had submitted the precedent decisions of the General Criminal Board of the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court in this regard. For this reason, the file must be sent to the HSK and documents of value must be returned to us. Documents falling within the scope of the file that relate to private life must be destroyed. The Istanbul Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office, which has no investigative authority, therefore also has no authority to collect evidence. For this reason, all evidence obtained within the scope of the investigative proceedings conducted by the Istanbul Republic Chief Prosecutor's Office is unlawful pursuant to the principle that "the fruit of the poisonous tree is also poisonous." It cannot be used as evidence. Therefore, these promissory notes, which are of the nature of unlawfully obtained evidence, must not be the subject of the investigation. I do not wish to answer questions relating to promissory notes obtained through an unlawful search. They cannot be used as the basis for a judgment. These documents are of a nature that corroborates my claim of receivables. I also wish to state that I will make legal applications to the HSK on this matter.

It was asked, for the purpose of resolving a contradiction, that in her answer to Question 4, Rezan EPÖZDEMİR stated that from June 2021 onwards she had been pressuring Cengiz ÇALLI to repay the money she had lent him, yet the promissory note dated 09/07/2021 seized in the search of Rezan EPÖZDEMİR's office was drawn up after June:

I repeat my answer to Question 7 exactly. I do not wish to make a statement regarding unlawfully obtained evidence. In the crime of bribery mediation, the intermediary takes the money to the public official. As in this file, it is contrary to logic for the public official who received the bribe to bring money to the intermediary. At the time of the alleged events, I was also, as far as I recall, Atalay's attorney. When the matter is viewed from this angle as well, it will become apparent how absurd the allegation is.

Question 8: She was asked about her defense regarding the fact that the total value of the seized promissory notes is 2,490,000 TL, that at the time the notes were drawn up the average salary of judges and prosecutors was 11,000–12,000 TL, and that by rough calculation this corresponds to an amount that Cengiz Çallı could only pay from his salary over approximately 18 years without any expenditure — a matter contrary to the normal course of life:

As I also said in response to the previous question, I do not wish to answer a question relating to unlawfully obtained evidence. However, to note in parentheses: although I cannot recall the exact dates, Cengiz had purchased an apartment in his own name from Dap Yapı, a shop in his own name — but as far as I recall in his nephew's name — inside a shopping center called ADL in Sultangazi, and finally an apartment in Avcılar. He later sold the apartment he had purchased from Dap Yapı. He repaid part of his debt to me. For the shop in Sultangazi, he first bought half of it, and then, in order to buy the other half, he borrowed money from me at the Halkbank Sultangazi Branch, as I mentioned in my statements above.

Question 9: It was read out and she was asked that, according to consistent statements by Atalay Demirbaş and Kürşat Yılmaz — who served as Cengiz Çallı's clerk at the time of the events — as well as base station records and her own statement confirming that she frequently visited Cengiz Çallı's office, suspect Rezan Epözdemir queried personal data such as addresses, identity numbers, and phone numbers of parties in files she was following or intended to follow through Cengiz Çallı's prosecutorial role on UYAP:

I categorically reject the statements of Kürşat YILMAZ and the fraudster Atalay. It is out of the question for me to query any personal data through Cengiz ÇALLI's prosecutorial role. These are statements given in exchange for a benefit, organized by a hidden hand, and directed for the purpose of a frame-up. No specific statement has been made as to which individual's data was queried. An attorney can already examine any file they wish without submitting a power of attorney. These are abstract statements.

Question 10: She was asked about consistent statements indicating that Rezan Epözdemir went on vacation with Cengiz Çallı on more than one occasion and that, according to findings, all vacation costs were paid by Rezan Epözdemir; that Rezan Epözdemir and Cengiz Çallı frequently went to luxury restaurants and that all meal costs were also paid entirely by Rezan Epözdemir; and that in the examination of digital materials seized during the search, emails were found indicating that vacation costs were invoiced to suspect Rezan Epözdemir:

Although I do not recall whether I went on vacation with Cengiz, I have not seen the documents found in the digital materials indicating that Cengiz ÇALLI's vacation costs were invoiced to me, and these pieces of evidence are unlawfully obtained due to lack of jurisdiction. For this reason, I have nothing further to say about this question.

Question 11: She was asked about the finding, in a search conducted regarding the allegation that one of the two-vehicle annotation rights under the protection order issued in the name of Cengiz ÇALLI was used by suspect Rezan, that the vehicle with license plate 34 EP 1313 registered in the name of suspect Rezan EPÖZDEMİR was annotated under the protection order issued to Cengiz ÇALLI between 12/06/2019 and 05/10/2021:

Although I cannot recall exactly due to the passage of time, I had given it to him either for use by Cengiz's wife or because there was a problem with Cengiz's vehicle, in the form of a paid allocation. During a significant portion of that time period, he used the vehicle himself.

Finally, what I have to say is as follows. First, the file must urgently be sent to the HSK for the reasons I have explained above. Second, I wish to draw attention once again to the matter of unlawfully obtained evidence. All of the evidence obtained is unlawful. The investigations initiated with this evidence are also unlawful. I request that the said evidence be returned to us. Furthermore, any other investigations initiated with unlawfully obtained evidence must also be terminated. I wish to remind that the authorities conducting these investigations also bear recourse liability for compensation pursuant to Article 141 of the CPC. As of the date of the events, I have no suspicion of tampering with evidence, and given my current position, no suspicion of flight. Pursuant to the same article, I reserve my right to compensation due to the clearly unauthorized judicial supervision and search proceedings.

My son has a language course in London. Return flight tickets to London were purchased on 23 July, well before the date of the investigation. I request that the current judicial supervision measure be lifted as a priority so as to prevent further loss of rights, and that I be released without any judicial supervision measure being applied, for the reasons I have stated. I am also submitting the documents relating to the flight reservations to the file.

I request that an ex officio investigation be initiated against the persons who made statements against me for the crime of slander pursuant to Article 267 of the Turkish Penal Code.