How pro-government media covered the Dilruba verdict
Dilruba Kayserilioğlu, who was arrested following her remarks about the Instagram ban during a street interview, was acquitted of the charge of "publicly inciting hatred and enmity," but received a sentence of 7 months and 15 days for "publicly insulting a segment of the public based on social class, race, religion, sect, gender, or regional differences." So, how did pro-government media view the decision? Here are the details...
12punto
Dilruba Kayserilioğlu, who was arrested and held in custody for 18 days due to her comments in a street interview in İzmir, appeared before the 35th Criminal Court of First Instance.
While Kayserilioğlu was acquitted of the charge of "publicly inciting hatred and enmity," she was sentenced to 7 months and 15 days for "publicly insulting a segment of the public based on social class, race, religion, sect, gender, or regional differences."
'I EXPRESSED MY THOUGHTS'
In her first statement after the verdict, Kayserilioğlu said the following:
"Our legal process is ongoing. They will submit their requests to a higher court. I never doubted for a moment that I was innocent. My lawyers will make the necessary statements.
I expressed my thoughts within the scope of freedom of expression. I never thought I was guilty. I believe in my innocence. I also trust my lawyers completely.
HOW DID PRO-GOVERNMENT MEDIA VIEW IT?
The pro-government newspaper Sabah covered the story in its top headline with the title, "Prison sentence for foul-mouthed Dilruba."
The newspaper Yeni Akit featured the news on its front page, stating, "Now you'll learn 'how brains are sucked'! The sentence for foul-mouthed Dilruba has been decided."
The newspaper Yeni Şafak carried similar expressions to Sabah and Yeni Akit in its headline, calling Dilruba Kayserilioğlu "foul-mouthed."