Confession from Nevzat Bahtiyar! Narin Güran murder trial: 'I confess...'

The second hearing of the Narin Güran murder trial, in which she was made to appear as if she had gone missing on August 21 in the Tavşantepe neighborhood of Diyarbakır's Bağlar district and whose lifeless body was found on September 8, began yesterday (December 26).

LASTED 14 HOURS

During yesterday's (December 26) hearing, which lasted 14 hours, 3 witnesses and 3 defendants were heard.

The prosecutor argued that the family acted in an organized manner and participated in the murder of Narin. In the opinion, it was requested that mother Yüksel Güran, brother Enes Güran, uncle Salim Güran, and the confessor Nevzat Bahtiyar be sentenced to life imprisonment with aggravated circumstances, stating, "No good conduct reduction should be applied."

The second hearing of the trial, in which 4 detained defendants are being tried with a request for life imprisonment with aggravated circumstances, will continue on its second day.

Mother Yüksel Güran, brother Enes Güran, uncle Salim Güran, and their neighbor Nevzat Bahtiyar were brought to the Diyarbakır Courthouse from the Diyarbakır Penal Institution Campus by prison transport vehicles under heavy security measures.

The hearing will begin at 09:00 AM.

HEARING HAS BEGUN

Families will be admitted to the courtroom in the afternoon.

The second day of the Narin Güran trial has begun. The detained defendants were brought into the courtroom. Salim Güran, Enes Güran, and Yüksel Güran sat in the same seats they occupied yesterday. Nevzat has not yet arrived in the courtroom. Arif Güran has not yet arrived to observe the hearing. Since the presiding judge decided yesterday that he would not be admitted to the courtroom, the court will decide whether to admit Arif Güran today based on an interim ruling. The judge announced his decision. Only 15 people from the families will be admitted to the courtroom in the afternoon. 

Salim Güran approached the defendant's stand. Salim Güran will present his defense against the prosecutor's request for a life sentence with no possibility of parole.

Defendant Salim Güran: “Why are you not suspicious of this savage?”

Presiding Judge: Let us take your final defense, Salim; what do you have to say regarding the prosecutor's request?

Salim Güran: I went to the field as I do every morning, along with Mehmet Selim and his son Ramazan. Afterward, I went to the health center on the Bağlar side. I withdrew 4,000 liras from the bank across from the Government House and gave it to the children. Later, I sat at the tea house with my two sons. Then, I returned to the village from the same direction. I bought gas at the petrol station and came home. The weather was hot, so I sat in front of the air conditioner with my wife and two sons; we ate and rested.

Later, I went to the upper field to check on my work. At that time, the electricians arrived and said they had come to look at Mehmet Şerif's electrical fault. We went with their car. I saw that the cotton plants were infested with worms. The electricians mentioned the fee, and I told them to talk to my cousin. Ramazan called; he was busy with field work, so I went to him. We sat there for a while.

During the hours when Narin went missing, my daughter called me and told me the situation. Mehmet Selim had arrived, and we went to the scene together. Seeing the crowd, I noticed that everyone was crying. I called the commander and said, 'My brother's daughter is missing, send a team.' However, the commander said he was on leave. Upon this, I told Sabri, 'Let's check the school's camera, the gendarmerie will come.'

Samet Hoca heard. Sabri brought the key, and a friend from the gendarmerie came. We examined the camera and saw my uncle's children walking with Narin and heading up the path. We went to that area, looked where the sheep were, but we didn't find any trace.

Before dawn, we went to my brother Barış's house. Barış's wife, Yasemin, shouted, 'I saw this savage this morning!' (Pointing to Nevzat Bahtiyar.) Upon this, I said, 'Why don't you suspect him?'

'WE WENT TO THE HOCA TO FIND NARIN'

Salim Güran: Nevzat came to the house, and we talked about the car issue. I said to him, 'The person you bought the vehicle from has gone to prison.' Nevzat said, 'I don't have money.' Later, the community gathered, and we calculated the damage among ourselves. Since Nevzat had no money, we said, 'You can do the plastering for our house.' Afterward, Nevzat took on this job and set the price for the plastering work at 200,000 liras. However, after this incident, we did not speak with Nevzat for 3 months. Normally, when he saw me in the field, he would come to me and sit down. But for 3 months, he never came to me.

After Narin went missing, we spoke with the gendarmerie. They told me, 'Let's look at the 2 cameras in Dara.' The commander asked, 'How many roads are there?' They took me to some roads, but not to others. Later, the JASAT team arrived and said, 'We will examine all the cameras.' However, now the law enforcement is blaming the family, but they are not mentioning their own shortcomings. They have taken statements, but why didn't they examine the cameras during the hours Narin went missing on the path? When they couldn't find anything, they started blaming the family.

Afterwards, they took me to the center. The village headman said, 'How many wells are there in the village?' They asked me, and I said, 'I don't know.' We looked at the wells in the village together. Finally, they said, 'There is a well behind Mehmet Kaya's house,' and we checked there.

Let's come to the matter of the slipper: The commander said at that moment, 'There is something.' He said, 'Narin's slipper has been found.' I swear I am the last person to know. We came to the village, and while Melike and Birsen were by the school, they said, 'Turn on the camera! 17:30.' It was clear at that moment that the gendarmerie was suspicious of me.

The state had arrived in the village by then. Then we saw the gendarmerie there. A religious figure was talking to Muhammet. I said to the elder, 'Grandpa, show us where Narin is.' He didn't understand what I meant. I said again, 'Show me where Narin is.' They said, 'Grandpa, shed light on this place.' I was shocked. He said, 'Narin is eating pasta.' There was an old man next to him. I asked, 'What is Narin doing?' He said, 'She is on the internet with a phone.' I felt hopeful for a moment. Later, I dropped Muhammet off at the gas station.

 

'DNA WAS FOUND IN MY CAR'

Salim Güran: Then it was said that DNA was found in my car. All the evidence appeared in the media. The commander said, 'You went to the gas station,' and mentioned a blanket. I said, 'Commander, what are you talking about?' They got up, grabbed me, and put me in prison. I have never seen a prison in my life. I was watching television in prison, and they were saying, 'The confessor, codenamed N.B.' Who is this? I don't know him.

Then I said, 'Nevzat Bahtiyar.' Narin's body was found. I wanted to go to my niece's grave, but they wouldn't let me. They took the television away from me because I was following the events. The media destroyed a family. Why did they arrest me? If they hadn't arrested me, Nevzat would have confessed. When Nevzat was caught, he said, 'Salim Güran.' He had learned everything—the blood, the DNA—from the media.

They got up and took me back to the courthouse. Nevzat keeps saying 'car' in his statement because he knows there is DNA in the car. He says, 'I came by car.' He says, 'He handed her through the window,' but the window is broken. He says 'blanket,' mentioning the blanket he heard about in the media. They took the car for examination twice; this time, hair was found. My niece may have gotten into that car, but that car isn't even mine. Everyone uses that car.

"I DEMAND MY ACQUITTAL"

Salim Güran: It is not clear whether that DNA belongs to two months ago. But I am in prison because of that DNA. Now, base station records have emerged. Can I be in two places at once? This is impossible. I am in the village, but the base station record shows me by the creek. How can a base station record appear for a place I did not go to?

There is a death here; why is there so much malice? I did not go to that area. Now, where is the whole family? In prison. While we were struggling to find Narin, our entire family is now in prison. Father and son are in prison. But where are Nevzat Bahtiyar and his family members? Outside. He destroyed both our daughter and our family.

I am calling out to the judge and state officials from here: Please, let a large-scale investigation be launched into these law enforcement officers. We are not traitors. We once chased away a DEM Party food vehicle from the village. Even if I were to die of hunger, I would not eat that food; they are just looking for a show.

I have another daughter younger than Narin. I swear my sister-in-law would die for her children. You killed our daughter, you are casting aspersions on our honor, and you are trying to destroy our family. This is an injustice.

Nevzat's lawyer took a photo with his wife. Fear God! My heart breaks when I see my sister. Do not play with our honor.

I do not accept the accusations. I demand my acquittal. 

 

"WE ARE TIRED OF NEVZAT'S LIES"

After Salim Güran's defense, the suspect's lawyer, Onur Akdağ, came to the podium.

Lawyer Onur Akdağ: Nevzat, who stood there like a log, reacted yesterday. One cannot trust the other statements of a person who has been exposed in a lie. Nevzat is a completely different person. How can six false statements fit into reason, logic, law, and conscience? With every development and every piece of evidence that emerges, Nevzat changes his testimony. Unfortunately, we are just watching this.

We want an end to this habit of Nevzat's of rapidly changing his testimony. Won't someone stand up and say to this man, "Enough is enough, be quiet! We are tired of your lies!"?

Mr. President, wherever a person goes missing, the search should begin from the point closest to that location. We all see who the obvious suspect is.

 

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, when he was taken into custody, Nevzat told two different stories. Later, these stories gradually diversified and multiplied. At one point, Nevzat said, 'It was not in the back seat, not in the trunk, but in the front seat where everyone could see it.' Why am I emphasizing this? Because the files decided upon by the investigative authorities were openly leaked to the media. All documents, including DNA reports, were published in full detail.

There is an approximate timeline for when this murder was committed. Narin was last seen on the school camera at 15:15. It is stated that she was killed on that road. The vehicle in which she was allegedly transported while dead was detected at a point at 15:40. So, there is only a 29-minute time window in between.

Shall I tell you the moment of Narin's death? The moment of death must have occurred around 15:19 on the street where Nevzat's house is located. There is a 27-minute time window involved. Within this period, if it is assumed that the child went onto the path, this time remains at most 19 minutes. Now I ask, who can explain with logic and reason that this murder was committed with a complex plot within these 19 minutes?

Therefore, the evidence and the plot must be as simple and logical as possible. Justice cannot be served with an indictment built on complex and irrational scenarios.

'WHY IS NEVZAT'S WIFE NOT IN CUSTODY'

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, why did the gendarmerie not conduct a search in Nevzat's house? Or, while taking all of Narin's friends into custody, did you not consider taking Nevzat's wife into custody, for example? In that case, the questions you asked would have been much different.

Look, this man says, "I took the body to the house." Well, was anyone other than Nevzat in the house at that time or not? This question was not even asked. Why? Because the story suited your purposes. At the very least, shouldn't you have asked, "Wasn't Nevzat's wife in the house?" Why didn't you take his wife into custody? Can this be ignored when there are so many false statements?

Furthermore, doesn't Gazal's statement seem strange to you? Hasn't Muhammed been in solitary confinement for three months just because he found a slipper? Gazal could potentially be one of the people who saw the body. I am saying at the very least, at the very least. She could be one of the people who committed the murder or one of those trying to cover it up. We have very serious doubts about this, Mr. President. Didn't you ever suspect Gazal?

The man says, "I took the body to the house," but no search was conducted in the house. Moreover, the gendarmerie escorted the man's wife while she was moving belongings out of the house. How can moving belongings be allowed in a house where there is a possibility that the body was transported? What kind of logic is this? That house is now a crime scene. This is a basic procedure, but it was completely ignored here. 

 

"HE ATE, HE DRANK, AND PINNED THE MURDER ON THE FAMILY"

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, Nevzat pinned the murder on the family by saying, "I ate, I drank, and I stuck you with the bill." Nevzat has been playing all of Turkey like a fiddle, and unfortunately, he continues to do so. Now, we would like to talk a little about the communication records between Nevzat and Salim.

According to the communication detection information for Nevzat and Salim, Salim last called Nevzat on May 21, 2024. After that date, Salim never called Nevzat again. Nevzat calls him from time to time. There are a total of 47 phone calls between them. Just as there was hostility before, after the land dispute between Salim and Nevzat, Salim does not establish any relationship with Nevzat, does not speak to him, and does not even greet him.

When we look back from the date of the incident, Salim did not call Nevzat for exactly 3 months. He did not call. I will not speak to Nevzat for 3 months, I won't even greet him, but then I will kill a child and make him a partner in my crime and sin, is that it? This is an illogical claim.

Now it is being asked, "If Nevzat did it, why wasn't Nevzat accused at the beginning?" Because Nevzat was practically acting a role after the child went missing. Looking Arif in the eye, he comforted him by saying, "God is great, don't worry, she will be found." He offered him cigarettes, and they prayed together. He told these lies while looking the family in the face.

Nevzat was effectively hypnotizing the entire family. Naturally, no one suspected him. However, all these behaviors and the flow of events are revealing Nevzat's true face today.

 

"WE MUST UNDERSTAND NEVZAT'S MENTALITY AND BEHAVIORS"

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. Presiding Judge, Nevzat keeps changing his story. While evaluating this situation, we want to mention a possibility in the case. Look, we are saying only a possibility. The forensic medical report states that there is no clear finding of sexual assault. However, this does not mean that a sexual motivation is completely absent. No one can fully understand Nevzat's dark mentality. We believe he may have committed this murder both to take revenge and to satisfy his impulses. His subsequent behaviors, unfortunately, support this possibility.

The forensic report states that no direct evidence of sexual assault was found on Narin's body. However, it is also necessary to benefit from studies conducted to understand pedophilic tendencies. In this context, we would like to bring a section from a foreign article to the court's attention. This article states that pedophilia generally involves the development of sexual fantasies and impulses toward prepubertal children (under 13). Pedophiles experience serious internal conflicts due to these impulses and often face problems such as social isolation, loneliness, low self-esteem, and emotional immaturity.

This information may shed light on our understanding of Nevzat's mentality and behaviors. Furthermore, there are some deficiencies in the reports regarding the comparison of DNA samples taken from a black t-shirt belonging to Narin and from the vehicle. According to the analyses conducted by the Van Criminal Laboratory, it is stated that DNA findings belonging to Narin were found in the swab samples taken from the front left seat of the vehicle with license plate 47 KM 388. However, no clear explanation has been provided regarding the nature of this DNA sample.

It must be clearly stated whether these samples are sweat, urine, blood, saliva, or fluids related to death. Therefore, we request that the current findings be examined in more detail and that an additional report be prepared. We request from the court that all missing points that will help clarify this murder be completed.

 

"THE FAKE POST WAS MADE BY NEVZAT OR HIS FAMILY"

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

In the Van Criminal report dated September 12, it was determined that the hair samples from the inner part of the right rear door were compatible with the DNA profiles obtained from the stain samples previously taken from Narin's dress and blankets. Do you know what it means to have multiple DNAs found in different places? This means that Narin may have been driven around in the vehicle while she was alive, that she may have entered the vehicle at different times from different places, or that her relatives who had contact with Narin may have entered that vehicle. In other words, it is a very clear and obvious fact that Narin was in the vehicle while she was alive.

Besides, touch DNA can be detected even years later. So, when did this DNA get into that vehicle? On the day of the incident, ten days ago, or five years ago? Every possibility is possible. Furthermore, it is proven by reports that Salim did not wash his vehicle on that day or afterwards, and left it with its dust and dirt.

Another important issue is Nevzat's first statement. While Nevzat claimed in his first statement that Salim brought Narin's lifeless body to the lower road, in his statement dated September 21, he said that he wrapped the body in a blanket himself, but then came to the lower road with Salim's vehicle to pick up the blanket. However, this claim is completely refuted by the existing base station reports. According to the base station reports, the base signals of Salim and Nevzat do not intersect on the lower road. This invalidates Nevzat's statements.

Contrary to Nevzat's statements, it has been clearly revealed by base station reports and camera footage that Salim did not put Narin's lifeless body into the vehicle. Meanwhile, the blanket issue was shared on social media for the first time. For example, baseless allegations were made against Salim Güran by an account belonging to Murat Çınar Çatalcı. It is also claimed that there are records regarding the cars. 

Another striking detail is the village headman's meeting with Narin's brother Enes and his bringing up the allegation of Narin's drowning immediately after the incident. According to phone records and camera footage, Narin is lying in the front seat, either unconscious or drowned, wrapped in a dark brown blanket.

At this point, there is a very interesting situation. While there is nothing yet, Enes, Salim, Yüksel, and the blanket are being mentioned. It is quite thought-provoking that these allegations coincide exactly with the day Salim was arrested. Who is posting these social media messages? Isn't it Nevzat or his family? All these contradictions show how dubious the trial process has been conducted.

"ARE ALL THESE DETAINEES PROTECTING ENES?"

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, do you think a father would harm his own daughter, hide it, and then not tell anyone? Wouldn't he turn around and say: 'Damn it, at least bury my daughter in a grave! Was my daughter an animal? Is this state looking after me with its own eyes?'

Did all these detained men, women, and children sacrifice themselves just for Enes? Despite the torture, they are not confessing. For what? For Enes? For Salim?

If Nevzat took his son's vehicle to use that day, how could Salim know that? This question is also quite interesting. We asked him. Now, for God's sake, is there no one among you who will question whether these scenarios are logical? I am not making these scenarios up, do not misunderstand me. These are things that some foolish, unprincipled, and mindless people are imposing on society 24/7.

No one asks this: 'Why did Salim, who was carrying out the maneuvers, pay bills on that very day?' Wouldn't he say? My brother Salim, wouldn't he say, 'What shall we do, how shall we act, such an incident has occurred?'

Now let us come to the common point of both our scenarios, that is, the funniest part. While all these events are happening to him, Salim pays two bills via mobile banking: one at 15:19 and the other at 15:28. Although this information was in the file in the preliminary report dated September 11, we are still presenting this information to the court on December 15.

We are honored and proud to be a member of the Diyarbakır Bar Association. I would like to underline this. The fact that the esteemed former Bar President Naif Eren frequently mentioned us in his defenses both made us proud and gave us pause. However, Naif Eren accused me on social media of debating the evidence. Since you are debating the evidence, I thought, I will structure all my defenses through you.

We see that this case has been completely inflamed by social media and a terrible public perception. Many questions in this investigation are based on claims spread on social media. For example, the gas station attendant, for example, false statements like there is vomit on the steering wheel... 

 

"IF WE REMOVE SALİM FROM THE FILE, THE CASE WILL BE SOLVED"

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, let's come to the pedometer. A movement begins for Salim between 15:20 and 15:22. The minimum entry-exit distance is 120 steps. He enters the house at 15:22. Between 15:22 and 15:32, he continues to move inside Arif's house and in other rooms. According to the scenario, does he take 50 more steps in the house? No, not just 50 steps.

Salih moves to the back door of the barn again around 15:36. There is a distance of 70 steps between his exit from the house and his entry to the back of the barn. It is a total of 140 steps round trip. Because in the same time frame, it is seen that Salih is in Arif's house again. He leaves the house at 15:41, moves to the back of the barn, and takes 60 more steps. At 15:42, it is claimed that he is on the road between Arif's house and his own house. 80 more steps are recorded here. At 15:43, he is seen in front of Arif's house again, and he has taken at least 20 more steps.

According to the base station report, it was determined that Salih was inside Arif's house again at 15:22. 10 more steps are added here.

Mr. President, there is a huge contradiction here. When the pedometer issue started to be discussed, everyone started saying, "Nobody is accusing Salih anyway." But the point is this: How did Salim become aware of the incident?

I am not Enes's lawyer, but I know this: If Salim is not the organizer of the incident and has no connection to the murder, all the blame in this file will be dumped on Nevzat. Now it is necessary to ask these questions:

1. Who killed Narin?

2. Who called Nevzat?

3. Who threatened or persuaded Nevzat?

Some people claim, "Pedometer app data can be deleted hour by hour." However, our scientific research shows that it is not possible to delete hourly data in pedometer apps. The app used on Salim's phone is a foreign application. In this app, only data for a specific date can be deleted, but it is not possible to delete hourly data.

Therefore, whether the pedometer app contains an error or if the data has been manipulated must be examined in detail. However, according to our current findings, it seems impossible for there to be an error or manipulation in this data.

In this case, we argue that a more detailed investigation should be conducted regarding the contradictions in Salih's pedometer data. 

"NEVZAT'S INTERNET IS AT JET SPEED"

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, in the hours following the murder, Nevzat's internet usage reached record levels. Yesterday, Salim's internet usage between 15:00 and 15:40 was criticized by claiming it was very low compared to other hours. However, the reality is quite different. We are not just talking about Salim's internet history here, but also a comparison of the internet usage of Salim and Nevzat.

Yesterday, an attempt was made to paint a picture by focusing only on Salim's internet usage. Now, let's examine the data together:

Salim's internet usage:

•Intense internet usage is observed from 15:14 to 15:45.

•At 15:25:08, a record level of internet usage is recorded for Salim.

•At 15:26, there is again significant internet usage.

•At 15:27:43, extremely intense usage is detected.

•From 15:28:54 to 15:33:43, there is again intense internet usage.

•Data flow continues at 15:33:43.

•It is noted that Salim used the internet heavily between 15:36 and 15:41.

 

Nevzat's internet usage:

•Internet usage begins at 15:10:24. However, from this point until 15:15:30, there is almost no internet usage. Even background applications appear to be closed. Because he is committing the murder. 

•There is a small amount of data flow between 15:15 and 15:20, but it is not significant usage.

•At 15:26:09, internet usage stops almost completely, and no significant data flow is observed until 16:01. Because he is placing Narin in the stream.

•There is a brief period of intensity at 16:01, after which internet usage is cut off again.

•Between 17:06 and 17:49, Nevzat exhibits record-level internet usage, almost at lightning speed.

Now, could Nevzat's intensive internet usage between 17:06 and 17:49 have been for the purpose of concealing certain critical steps taken after the incident or to obtain information?

Consequently, there are significant differences between the internet usage of Salim and Nevzat. This data is of great importance for shedding light on the incident. Therefore, making an assessment based solely on Salim's internet data is an approach that does not reflect the truth. 

“LET'S COME TO THE GYPSY CAR”

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, let us now move on to the issue of the red-colored gypsy vehicle. In this regard, there are claims about two gypsies and a red vehicle being seen, and mention is made of a voice recording of Salim. The prosecution claims that with this statement, the village head (muhtar) misled the search efforts and attempted to divert attention elsewhere.

 

Now, if you wish, let us listen to this voice recording together. (The voice recording was played) It is clearly seen in this recording that Salim is merely recounting what he hears from the villagers. He is, in a sense, relaying information circulating in the village. He even asks questions to the person next to him because he learned the information from them. Salim's statements are based not on his own observations, but on what he heard from others.

 

When we carefully examine this voice recording, we can see that Salim is not engaged in any manipulation or intentional effort. His only goal is to share what he has heard. For this reason, it is not fair to evaluate this recording as an element that constitutes a crime or raises suspicion.

 

“SALIM WAS BY THE CREEK THAT NIGHT”

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, the allegations that Salim went to Eğertutmaz Creek in his own vehicle that night to check on the body were not included in the prosecutor's opinion. The make, color, and model of the vehicle could not be clearly identified on the camera. Furthermore, it has not been proven with certainty that Salim was there based on the narrowed base station records.

The footage from the farm cameras has been presented for all of our attention. The vehicle, which is alleged to contain Salim, is first seen on camera at 22:33. The vehicle waits without turning off the engine between 22:48 and 22:55, and disappears from view in the direction it came from at 22:56.

Fortunately, there is a voice recorder on Salim's phone. A 23-second phone call was recorded that night at 22:41. The vehicle we see on the farm camera is making meaningless maneuvers behind the tree at that moment. The vehicle does not stop, and no one gets into it. However, when we listen to the audio recording, we hear Salim walking and people being with him.

Speaking in Kurdish, Salim explains that they are searching with 300 people and have not been able to find the children. This conversation clearly reveals the situation at the scene. Additionally, his phone calls with Kurtuluş Güran at 22:32 and with Arif Güran at 23:01 were also recorded. These records very clearly show that Salim was in the vicinity of the village.

 

Go ahead, let's examine these audio recordings now. 

(Audio recordings are being played) 

 

“TAVŞANTEPE HAS THE WIDEST COVERAGE AREA IN TURKEY”

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, we are facing a major contradiction. There are serious errors in the assessments made based on base station reports. Specifically, the claims regarding the reception of signals from base stations in the Tavşan Tepe region are based on completely misleading information.

It is stated that at least 22 different signals were received from Tavşan Tepe. However, looking at the maps we have, we can clearly see the distribution of base stations around Tavşan Tepe. These maps show all the base stations located near Tavşan Tepe. The closest base station is 3.7 kilometers away. This situation seriously calls into question the accuracy of the alleged signal detections.

We believe that the report in question was prepared by individuals who are not experts in this field. The report appears to have been prepared without examining the information and documents in the file. Furthermore, we argue that the base station report created based on Nevzat's statements is merely a preparation of a scenario. It is not possible for a base station study to yield reliable results without technical tracking.

The method known as base station triangulation can only provide narrowed-down results in cases of real-time technical tracking. However, no such technical tracking was performed in this file. The areas of expertise, qualifications, and credentials of the people who prepared the report are unclear. We do not know any of this information.

Similar contradictions emerged in the first hearing as well. The report states that Salim was in the vicinity of his residence between 18:08 and 18:56, and that he moved at 18:57 to be in the cornfield on the Uzunbahçe side. However, the same report claims that Salim passed in front of the school camera at 18:57. This is a completely contradictory situation.

The report paints such a picture that it almost portrays Tavşan Tepe as having the widest coverage area in Turkey. This reveals how technical data is being distorted.

Our persistent request to the court is for an on-site inspection regarding these base station studies and for a report prepared by independent experts to be added to the file. Villagers living in this area state that, let alone internet, even phone reception is unavailable in many spots. We must also consider that even location sharing has a margin of error of at least 200-300 meters. Therefore, the accuracy of the current reports must definitely be questioned.

“EVERYONE SHOULD REVEAL WHO THE KILLER IS”

Lawyer Onur Akdağ:

Mr. President, what do the narrowed base station data and the National Criminal Report tell us? Everyone should now reveal who the killer is. Let us not fight blindly. Is the killer Salih? Or is it Enes? When we say “the killer is Nevzat,” we are not saying it for no reason. We have presented and submitted a lot of evidence. However, what are we told? “Everyone could be the killer.”

Even in the prosecutor's opinion, it is not clearly stated who the killer is or where the child was taken. The “illicit affair” slander directed at Salih draws suspicion toward him. Then, by mentioning a “princess dog” or “incestuous relationship,” they direct suspicions toward Enes this time.

So, what does the base station report say? The base station report clearly states that Salim was at Arif’s house at 15:22. What does this mean?

First: At the time Nevzat called Salim due to the water issue, Salim was not at home. Because at 15:10, Arif’s house and Salim’s house were in different locations. In other words, Salim is being directed to be handed over via the path that leads him to the scene of the incident. Nevzat goes up the path as if by divine sign, and at that moment, the child is still headed toward the path.

Second: Salim arrives at the house after the child has already arrived. Salim’s entry into the house occurs at 15:22. This shows that the report refutes the slanders made against Salim.

Another point in the report concerns the exit door of Arif's house. Arif's house has two exit points. The outer door is made of white wire mesh and is difficult to open from the outside. On that day, Arif opened the door himself when he perceived a danger. Additionally, there is also an inner door in the house.

Now let's come to Enes's objections. How would Enes react when told, 'Your uncle did these things with your mother, we wasted time with your sister'? Everyone heard him say these words to me. If such slanders were believed, wouldn't Enes at least have to take a knife from the kitchen and react? But no such situation occurred.

Now let's briefly summarize the scenario:

•Salih leaves his own house at 14:52.

•He is seen at the exit point of Arif's house at 15:18.

•According to the scenario, the child goes out onto the path at 15:14, and four minutes later, Salih reaches the house at 15:22.

•Salih is in the empty room opposite the kitchen between 15:22 and 15:26.

Another situation is Nevzat's behavior. Nevzat does not appear in any footage regarding where he took the child at 15:40. However, some reports point to the location where Narin Güran's body was found at 16:00.

In light of these reports, it is very clearly seen that Salih has no connection to the incident. However, the evidence must be carefully examined to reveal who the real perpetrator is.

In light of this evidence, we request the acquittal of Salim Güran, or if acquittal is not possible, his release under house arrest. 

The hearing has been adjourned. The trial will continue at 2:00 PM with the defense of Nevzat Bahtiyar.

The hearing is resuming after a 2-hour break. Nevzat Bahtiyar will take the stand. However, before that, Nevzat Bahtiyar's lawyers met with their client in the courtroom. The presiding judge has entered the courtroom.

“I AM NOT A SAVAGE OR A PARROT”

Nevzat Bahtiyar:

I only moved the body; that is the only crime I committed. I did nothing else. Salim is trying to pin all the blame on me. Salim's lawyer called me a “savage parrot.” I did not want to use that word. I am not a parrot. If I were, I would live in the jungle.

I supposedly threw the body savagely inside the barn, is that it? Well, why would I do that? There is a place in the back; someone could have seen me. I lied because my family was not safe; I was afraid. I felt relieved when my family came to the prison. Once I was assured of my safety, I said, “I am ready to tell everything.” I am not a parrot.

I didn't even get a haircut until my family came to see me. There is neither a television nor a radio in the prison. How could I know this information? I said 'eggplant,' and everyone laughed. I said that just to be funny.

'I CONFESS MY CRIME'

Nevzat Bahtiyar:

I remained silent until the safety of my family was ensured. Salim is lying about the car. The man couldn't sell the car. I told Salim, 'If you have the money, buy it for yourself.' He went and made a deal to buy the car. He registered the car in my name so his brother wouldn't know.

Then the matter of the house came up. He asked me, 'How much will you charge?' I called him in the evening and said, 'It would be 270,000 liras, but for you, it will be 150,000 liras.' He said, 'Someone offered 140,000 liras, and someone else gave another price.' He said, 'Expenses like labor and drinking water will also be their responsibility.' Now he has stood up and is lying by saying, 'He gave a price of 200,000 liras.' Tell me exactly what I told you.

You called me, and I handed over Narin. I am not denying this. I only transported her; I accept my crime. But they also need to accept their crimes. However, they are not doing so; they are blaming everything on me. They want me to take the blame for everything, but I cannot accept that.

I may not have anything else to say. I am not in a position to say anything to them or to slander them. Let the truth, whatever it may be, come to light.

 

'I AM A MOTHER, SHE SHOULD NOT WAG HER FINGER'

Nevzat Bahtiyar’s Lawyer Ali Eryılmaz:

Mr. President, our client should be approached as a 'defendant,' not a 'murderer.' Please, let the other defense attorneys respect this.

The public, journalists, and the court panel are fighting for justice for Narin. However, some are blaming others to cover up their own faults.

Yes, if they want the public and journalists to be silent, they will come out and reveal the murderer of that child. One of them will come out, and if they are a man, they will act like a man and confess.

In a report kept by the Gendarmerie, Yüksel Güran said: 'Since there are boys in the house, if I am going somewhere, I leave Narin with Maşallah.'

Look, there is another case: the Rojin case in Van. Rojin’s father left no stone unturned. Even the lawyer cried during this case. The father slept on the beach because he had nowhere else to go. (At this point, the lawyer could not hold back his tears.)

Therefore, Narin is not just the daughter of the Güran family, and she is no longer theirs at all. She is the daughter of 85 million people. Still, no one from the Güran family has the courage to do anything for Narin.

They are putting on a show here. Perhaps they took drama lessons outside or in the village. However, they are not taking any steps to rectify this situation. They have plenty of money; you can sell more 400-acre fields. When this file returns from the Court of Cassation, these fields might also slip out of their hands...

At this point, Salim Güran and Yüksel Güran wanted to respond. Yüksel Güran said, "I am a mother, do not wag your finger at me." Lawyer Ali Eryılmaz replied, "I am making a defense, be quiet."

 

"THERE IS A 'SAVE ENES' OPERATION HERE"

Lawyer Ali Eryılmaz:

Mr. President, we are witnessing a "Save Enes" operation here, much like in the movie Saving Private Ryan. The family is acting with this goal in mind. However, no one is thinking about Narin.

There are many people. So, why Nevzat when there are so many people? Why Salim? I will also give some examples from the defenses. Since there was a wedding that day, everyone from the village had left. Supposedly, no one was left in the village. If no one was left in the village, who is Salim's closest, best friend? Salim's friend, Nevzat. They are inseparable. They sit and drink together. Moreover, they spoke on the phone 9 minutes before the incident.

What did Salim realize at that moment? He says, "Nevzat was at his house and I can control him. He will do whatever I say." Where are Salim's older brother, his siblings, his children? Could they find a better "puppet" than Nevzat?

Yes, Nevzat changed his statements. However, there are a few elements that remain constant within these statements. Nevzat always said, "Salim gave me the body." He always stated, "Salim told me, 'I killed her for this reason.'" In other words, he clearly stated the reason for the killer and from whom he received the body.

The fact that Nevzat's statements differ does not create a significant change regarding the essence of the case. Because these statements by Nevzat still form the key point of the case. The Prosecutor also drew attention to Nevzat's statements. However, we see that some people have not focused enough on these statements.

Some elements, even if as contradictory as Nevzat's statements, are worth considering in this court. When you look at the statements of the other defendants, you also see that they have changed their testimonies multiple times. But which statement did they take as the basis? Most of these statements do not reflect the truth anyway.

As a result, Nevzat's statements should be one of the most important pieces of evidence in clarifying the case for the court.

 

“NEVZAT WAS NOT UNDER THE BED”

Lawyer Ali Eryılmaz:

Mr. President, I do not accept the base station report. The HTS report can be accepted as evidence. It was actually prepared very well. However, I absolutely do not accept the base station report.

I was going to say some very important things regarding Hediye. I was even going to address the complicity aspect of these crimes. I was going to say that they are not just 4 people, but actually 5. However, Mr. Nahit explained it very well yesterday. Therefore, I will no longer make a defense regarding Hediye.

Now let's come to the gendarmerie's identification of Nevzat. They are investigating the owner of the red vehicle caught on camera. As a result of the investigations, the owner of the vehicle turns out to be Nevzat's son. Upon this, the gendarmerie goes to the house to take the son. However, the event that unfolds when they arrive at the house is as follows: Nevzat Bahtiyar says, “The person you are looking for is not my son, it is me.” He adds, “He is not under the bed, on top of the quilt, or anything like that. He came to the door, I am the person you are looking for.”

With these statements, we believe that more attention should be paid to Nevzat's declarations in order to solve the case.

 

“I REQUEST NEVZAT'S RELEASE”

Lawyer Ali Eryılmaz:  

"Narin's time of death is 15:16. At 15:16, Narin closed her eyes to this world. There is no concrete evidence that Nevzat Bahtiyar participated in the murder. Therefore, I request that my client be released."

 

“WHY IS NEVZAT STANDING SO CALMLY”

Nevzat Bahtiyar's Lawyer Adnan Ataş:

Mr. President, if we are talking about Enes in this file, we are not basing this on a record. However, the lawyers for the other defendants slandered Nevzat Bahtiyar with pedophilia. We absolutely reject this allegation.

Regarding the crime scene, our client does not have a single statement. My client gave all his statements in the same way the moment he felt his family's safety was ensured. He stated that Narin Güran was on the floor in the room and that foam was coming out of her mouth. However, he never described the crime scene.

Neither Salim Güran nor Enes Güran called Arif Güran when Narin went missing. Yes, it was mentioned that Nevzat changed his statement. But if changing a statement is such an important situation, the entire Güran family also changed their statements. In this case, was this entire plan made only to protect Nevzat?

I would like to touch upon another point. The term "cold-blooded" is being used for Nevzat. However, he was thinking about his family. That is why we did not even deem it appropriate for his family to come here. Because even in the courtroom, pressure is being exerted on my client by the Güran family. The defendants are constantly hurling insults.

Nevzat felt alone and helpless. He has withdrawn into himself due to these pressures. We request that my client's situation be evaluated within this framework.

 

"THE BRUISES ON ENES'S FACE POINT TO A STRUGGLE"

Lawyer Adnan Ataş:

Mr. Presiding Judge, let us now come to the matter of the red gypsy vehicle. In that audio recording, a conversation taking place in the background is mentioned. In the conversation, information obtained from the surroundings is being relayed to the gendarmerie. However, it must be stated here: This audio recording from 22:30 does not belong to the time frame when the gendarmerie was first called.

The gendarmerie was first called at 20:18. In this call, Salim Güran called the gendarmerie and spoke directly about "two gypsies and a red vehicle." In other words, this information was presented to the gendarmerie from the very first moment.

As for the issue of the misdirection of the gendarmerie, at this point, Arif Güran states that his own family misdirected the gendarmerie. This is not only a matter that caught the attention of the gendarmerie, but also a matter that caught the attention of Arif Güran himself. So, are all these pieces of evidence, all these contradictions, and these misdirections being orchestrated for Nevzat?

Furthermore, it is impossible for the bruises on Enes's face to have been caused by a "corn cob." This situation clearly points to a struggle. It is also believed that Narin died during a struggle. The location where the incident took place is at the top of the slope.

Mr. President, when all these details are evaluated together, we believe that a more careful and meticulous investigation must be conducted to shed light on the true face of the incident.

 

COURT PRESIDENT: "WE WILL HAVE THE FINAL SAY"

Lawyer Adnan Ataş:

Mr. President, whatever happened, it happened in the barn and in Arif Güran’s house. Narin practically held her killer in her palm and left clues for us to see. That is why different hair lengths were found. All of these hairs cannot belong to Narin; there are both short and long hair samples.

As for the carpet issue, Mr. Nahit Eren explained this matter very well yesterday. Is it possible that no DNA was found in the house at all? This is a serious deficiency in terms of solving the case.

It is said that if Salim said "cucumber," Nevzat Bahtiyar would run to get salt. That is how close the friendship and relationship between Salim and Nevzat are. However, on the day of the incident, unfortunately, Salim involved Nevzat in this business.

(As Lawyer Adnan Ataş tries to finish his speech by saying these are my final sentences)

Court President: “We will have the final word,” he replied jokingly.

 

“WE REQUEST HIS RELEASE FROM THE MURDER CHARGE” 

Lawyer Adnan Ataş:

Mr. President, we request the release of Nevzat Bahtiyar from the murder charge. Because he has already admitted to his other crime. He concluded his remarks in this manner.

Now, a short break has been taken. After a 46-minute break, Enes Güran's testimony will begin.

 

"ENES GÜRAN IS AT THE DEFENDANT'S STAND"

The hearing resumed after a short break. Defendant Enes Güran took the stand. Meanwhile, relatives of the Güran family, who were banned from entering the courtroom yesterday for causing a disturbance, were also allowed inside. The presiding judge warned them again not to cause any trouble.

"NEVZAT WOULD NOT EVEN BE A DOG AT OUR DOOR, BUT HE BECAME A MURDERER"

Defendant Enes Güran:

"I am not going to get an aggravated life sentence just for saying 'I am at home.' I was at home on the day of the incident; I do not deny this. In my first statement, I said 4:30. I couldn't remember everything, but then I remembered."

Let's come to the bruise on my face. Why would I harm myself? They should check the hospital cameras, but they don't exist. As for the bite mark on my arm, I said I did it myself. I did it over three days. I do not forgive them. If they want to hold someone accountable, let them come and rip my head from my body, but do not blame my sister.

As for the pink dress, Bertan said, 'The girl was kidnapped by gypsies.' We went to the animal market. We lost our minds, but we couldn't find her there either. I took that dress, it was something like a skirt, and I smelled it.

As for the marks on my waist, some lawyers said today, 'Nevzat Bahtiyar cannot be the Güran family's dog.' True, he cannot be their dog, but he became a murderer.

A sample was taken regarding the bite on my arm, but unfortunately, they said they couldn't identify it. Is this my fault? Look, let me show you. (He shows his arm.) I showed my arm myself. They took me to the provincial gendarmerie. They say, 'There is blood on the pants.' This is machine oil, not blood. I said, 'Commander, this is not blood.' I am calling out to that commander from here: You don't know anything.

If I had known my sister was dead, as the lawyers say, I would have done what was necessary. My mother wouldn't protect me; why would she say that? When Nevzat Bahtiyar was caught, I was not at home at that time. If I were lying, I would be on the side of the spectators. The truth is, I was at home at that time. What the bar association president said also does not match my situation. There is nothing against me.

My brother Ener is showing the rifle (weapon) in the house. Wouldn't he lie for me?

You need to look closely when I bite my arm. I went mad. You need to see the pain inside me. It is not easy. The Gendarmerie says, 'Do not participate in the search.' But I am eating myself up inside; this is not an easy thing.

 

"Enes: You will understand from your daughter

Nevzat: don't" 

 

"TENSION ERUPTED IN THE COURTROOM"

Defendant Enes Güran:

Nevzat Bahtiyar placed three stones on my sister. This man tells me, 'I hope you find her,' and then goes to work. He doesn't care about anything. Nevzat's son was with us every night. I saw him at the mosque, I helped him; I wish I hadn't. But you have made something up in your heads, and you have decided that it will be that way.

People say, 'The Güran family, the Güran family.' Prosecutors tell me, 'Your mother did it.' Let them come and say it to my face here.

When you say prison, don't just think of four walls. There are people who come to see me, to find me. I changed my name; I wasn't talking to anyone just in case. I wish I hadn't bitten my arm. Those who talk about my honor have no honor of their own. What will they say if we are acquitted? I will make it miserable for them.

I will serve time here today, I will serve 50, 60, or 90 years, but what will we say in the afterlife? What will you do when we meet then? I will not speak in this court, and I will not speak about Nevzat.

(Turning to address Nevzat Bahtiyar)

"You will understand from your daughter," he said.

Nevzat Bahtiyar stood up and replied,

"Don't do it."

Enes Güran: "I know what kind of family Nevzat Bahtiyar's family is. We, the youth, know."

“I wish I had died. I wish I had killed everyone”

Defendant Enes Güran:

I wish I had taken the Kalashnikov (weapon) from under the bed and mowed them all down. Now they have brought out the HTS records. They said, 'You are at home,' and yes, I am at home. I am telling the truth. I say torture was used, the gendarmerie is afraid and running away. There are men and girls there who act like women, but I am speaking out. Why don't they talk about what they did to me!

They are obsessed with saying, '400 decares of land.' I will return you to the other court. There is no 400 decares of land! I didn't even go to my sister's grave. I do not forgive any of you.

My sister did not come home. I am innocent, I do not accept any of the crimes. Finally, I wish I had died. I wish I had killed everyone. I wish I hadn't come here. I do not accept these slanders.

'There is no such thing as a possible perpetrator'

Enes Güran's Lawyer Mahir Akbilek:

Mr. President, there is no effort to discuss how the act of murder committed in complicity took place. Possible perpetrators are mentioned, but I will use the term 'possible perpetrator' here. Because this represents a side that does not exist in the law. There is no such thing as a possible perpetrator. There is no concrete determination regarding which defendant's action this act is connected to and their control over this action.

Let's come to the role my client Enes played in the incident... In the indictment and the opinion, there is no clear explanation as to what means Enes used to carry out the criminal act or how he participated in this crime. Likewise, no murder can be committed without a decision being made, even if it takes a second. However, it is seen that he is evaluated as a joint perpetrator using a method we just criticized, without any determination being made as to how my client participated in this decision.

Even if the esteemed panel has agreed with this assessment, we are of the opinion that this approach should be rejected. It is against the law for my client to be included in this crime without the complicity dimension of the crime, the evidence, and the control over the act being concretely demonstrated.

“We request the acquittal of Enes”

Lawyer Mahir Akbilek:

Mr. President, we are confident that the court will reach the correct decision without paying heed to anyone and without adopting an emotional approach. For this reason, we request that a verdict of acquittal be issued for my client, Enes Güran, and that all restrictive measures be lifted.

If the court holds a different view and decides that detention should continue, we request that my client be placed under house arrest.

Defendant Enes Güran’s lawyer, Muhammet Fatih Demir, came to the podium to present his defense.

Lawyer Muhammet Fatih Demir:

There are prejudices. People are calling for the death penalty based on these prejudices. Such a world does not exist. I look at the posts; they say, ‘Let the defendants receive the harshest punishment.’ Wait a minute! Let the perpetrator be punished, not the defendants. What if there is an innocent person? What if there is a truth that has been overlooked?

“Family Member Setup”

Lawyer Muhammet Fatih Demir:

Now, here, we do not have a mother, a father, a brother, or a sister before us. It is being portrayed as if we are only facing a concept called a 'family conspiracy.' Acting with this logic, attack after attack is being carried out. Public opinion has been formed, news has been shared, and allegations have been spread. However, we do not accept such an approach.

This type of criminalization or logic of attack does not exist in law. The nature of these lines is clear. It is unacceptable for the prosecution to present its case using concepts like the 'Güran Family' or 'family member conspiracy' in the indictment and the final opinion.

The reason these statements are unacceptable is that they are merely allegations. Because the verdict in this case will be based on whether or not these four individuals are the perpetrators of the murder. The verdict will not be executed based on such baseless statements.

Therefore, such statements described in the opinion are baseless, and it is not possible for us to agree with them,

'Nevzat is Really Very Intelligent'

Lawyer Muhammet Fatih Demir:

Mr. President, Nevzat Bahtiyar is really very intelligent. First, he says, 'I did not call Salim,' then he says, 'I did call.' He creates a narrative in this way. What he says after leaving the village generally appears consistent. However, when we reach 15:08, this narrative comes into play.

You claim both that you were drawing water from the mother's house and that you called Salim for water. Well, why exactly at that time? Yet, you are not supposed to be there. If he called for water, this situation does not seem sincere. Furthermore, the probability of him seeing Narin while irrigating in front of her mother's house is quite high.

Now, Nevzat Bahtiyar should have encountered Narin at the moment she was coming from the mosque. However, Nevzat says, 'I did not see her.' Yet, at that hour, the person closest to Narin was Nevzat Bahtiyar.

Moreover, in yesterday's hearing, he said, 'I was going to take the body from there.' Well, what was your motivation? You want Narin's body to be found, but you do not say a single word until the gendarmerie finds the body. This situation raises serious suspicions.

'Tension in the courtroom 

2 lawyers were removed from the courtroom'

Lawyer Muhammet Fatih Demir:

Mr. President, Nevzat is there for 30 minutes. Well, what did he do during this time? He is 52 years old, a very intelligent man. Now, it is possible that a judicial error has been made. Well, what leads a case to a judicial error? Usually, mistakes made by eyewitnesses. There are many similar situations in this file as well.

(The Güran family's lawyers requested that the media observe the trial, but the court rejected this request.)

I would like to point out that those who conducted the narrowed base station analysis are not experts. I spoke with those who work as experts on this subject, and they called these studies 'nonsense.' However, unfortunately, no one has provided us with an official report on this matter. Yesterday, Nahit Eren, in his speech...

(At this point, a lawyer from the Diyarbakır Bar Association intervened as remarks were being made about Nahit Eren and his legal team.)

The Presiding Judge ordered the two lawyers who interrupted the defense to be removed from the courtroom. Upon their objection, the Judge stated, 'I order them to be removed by the police. If they do not leave, I will instruct that they be dragged out,' and ensured the two lawyers were removed from the hall.

Narin murder trial adjourned:

No verdict was reached at the hearing, and it was decided to continue tomorrow at 10:00 AM.