Dorukhan's suspicious death transferred to the Forensic Medicine Institute, which the father, Büyükışık, views with suspicion

Müyesser YILDIZ / 12punto.com.tr

As the expert report obtained by the court from TRT was also deemed insufficient, it was decided to send the file first to the Forensic Medicine Institute and then to Istanbul Technical University (İTÜ).

Meanwhile, the grieving father, Büyükışık, claimed that he does not trust the Forensic Medicine Institute, and further alleged that the prime suspect in the case, the then-Narlıdere District Police Chief, is currently the Director of the Bursa Police Criminal Laboratory, and that the defendants are attempting to obtain a fraudulent report. 

The defendants' lawyer, Ergin Kılıç, stated that as a result of the perception created by Büyükışık, everyone in Turkey currently believes his clients prepared a fake report, and that they would be lynched if seen on the street.

The second hearing of the case, held at the Ankara 18th Criminal Court of First Instance, was attended by the accused non-commissioned officers, retired Major General Ethem Büyükışık, their lawyers, and Büyükışık's retired fellow officers.

The judge of the 18th Criminal Court of First Instance stated that the expert report requested from TRT regarding the audio recordings had arrived in accordance with the decision taken at the previous hearing, and after reading a summary of the report, asked the defendants to present their defense.

One of the defendants, O.K., reiterated that audio recordings can be affected by any natural environment and that everyone's perception may differ, claiming that Ethem Büyükışık's allegations have been proven false and that they did not destroy evidence. O.K., who also alleged that Büyükışık misled the public by appearing on television, leveled a pile of slanders against them, and created a perception, said, "There are differences between the four different reports in the file. This is inherent to audio. Since an audio recording is not 100 percent evidence like DNA or fingerprints, different software results have emerged. The report Büyükışık obtained from İTÜ is not even a report; such a report cannot exist. Even if this audio recording were to come 10 more times, we would write the same text," and requested his acquittal.

The other accused non-commissioned officer, O.B., also reiterated that what they wrote was clear and that the work they did was correct.

The grieving father, Ethem Büyükışık, pointed out that the defendants were trying to create a perception as if they were accusing the entire Gendarmerie organization, and after emphasizing that they were not accusing the institutions or the brilliant people working in these institutions, but only these two individuals, he explained the following:

“The reports received have revealed that my son was intentionally killed. As the defendants say, if everyone produces different reports, there would be no need for criminal laboratories or audio experts. In that case, judges and prosecutors would just put on headphones and listen. They report that they could not decipher conversations that are understandable when listened to with the naked ear or simple headphones. The two of them listened separately, but for some reason, they both said ‘Could not be understood’ for the same parts.”

SPECTATOR CALLED THE DEFENDANTS 'BRIBE-TAKERS'

During these statements by Büyükışık, a spectator was heard calling the defendant non-commissioned officers “bribe-takers.” After this spectator was removed from the courtroom at the request of the defendants, Büyükışık continued as follows:

“Levent Güner, from whom we received the first report regarding the audio recordings, is a retired senior gendarmerie colonel. He is one of the people who was on the team that established the Gendarmerie Criminal Laboratory, and he also established the first audio laboratory. He has prepared reports for critical cases, and not a single one of them has ever been the subject of a lawsuit. This report provided by Levent Güner also formed the basis for the reversal in favor of the law that allowed the case to be reopened.

When my son was killed with a construction rebar, I found the list of police officers on duty at the crime scene 5.5 years later. The police officers whose names are mentioned in the audio recordings were also on duty. But it took me 5 years to uncover that minutes were later drawn up for some of these police officers stating, ‘They were not at the crime scene.’ A chain of organized criminal groups carried out this work, and this investigation went off the rails.

Why did they do this? Although the Narlıdere District Police Chief of the time, I.Y., went to the crime scene, held meetings with the owner of the construction company, and gave instructions accordingly, he claims he did not go to the crime scene. Let me also say that it has emerged that this team was involved in an activity at the Izmir port.

They claim that the report we received from ITU is invalid and that we arranged for the person who gave the report. This is absolutely not true. I went to ITU because they had state power behind them and were manipulating things. I took out a loan and paid 96 thousand liras. The professor who gave the report is the pride of this country; he does not deserve the insults of these individuals.”

'WHERE IS THE PRIME SUSPECT NOW?'

While addressing the defendants' request to obtain a new report from the Forensic Medicine Institute or the Police Criminal Laboratory, Ethem Büyükışık raised the following interesting allegation:

“I am curious about this; where is the prime suspect, Narlıdere District Police Chief İ.Y., today? He has become the Bursa Police Criminal Chief. If your son were murdered and you saw this picture, what would you think? They have colluded; they are asking for a fake report. The Forensic Medicine Institute has provided fake reports before. Including its president, they are in this up to their necks. We do not accept it being sent to the Forensic Medicine Institute or the police criminal lab.

Meanwhile, the Gendarmerie General Command conducted an administrative investigation. They say, ‘We examined this; it is in accordance with the directive and meets the criteria. There may be different rumors.

We listened as well and heard the same sounds.’ This is said by a colonel. He is not a sound expert and has never worked in a sound laboratory. This report is also untrue, and we are filing a criminal complaint against that colonel as well.”

"EVERYONE IN TURKEY BELIEVES A FABRICATED REPORT WAS ISSUED"

The lawyer for the defendant non-commissioned officers, Ergin Kılıç, also stated at the beginning of his statement that they had brought a sound system and wanted to play the conversations from the crime scene.

The judge first replied, “Let’s listen, but I do not want any commentary.” However, upon Ethem Büyükışık’s warning, “How will we know it hasn’t been manipulated?”, he offered to provide the CD in court. Then he said, “There is no need to listen. You make your defense. I have listened to it many times, and I will listen again if necessary.”

Following these dialogues, Attorney Ergin Kılıç emphasized that there were four reports in the file, none of which matched the others, and directed the following accusations at Ethem Büyükışık:

"He considers everyone who does not provide a report in line with his own views to be a member of an organized crime syndicate. Tomorrow, the same accusation could be directed at your court. Fair trial is being openly violated through television and statements made to the press. Currently, everyone in Turkey believes that my clients provided a fabricated report. If they saw them on the street, they would lynch them."

Stating that the ITU report was "definitely not a scientific report" and that the report the court received from TRT was "probably listened to by sitting down just like us," Attorney Kılıç said regarding Büyükışık's remarks about the then-Narlıdere District Police Chief I.Y.: "I do not know that the person mentioned is at the Bursa police criminal laboratory. Trust in the state and institutions is essential. This is a case that has become a matter for everyone. No one would dare to provide a fake report."

Responding to the judge's warning to "wrap it up" by saying, "We can only speak here. We do not have the opportunity to speak on news channels," Attorney Kılıç requested that the audio recordings be sent to the Forensic Medicine Institute or the Police Criminal Laboratory for re-examination, that the commissioners D.A. and A.K., who were stated to be at the scene, be heard as witnesses, and that a voice analysis of D.A. be conducted.

While Ethem Büyükışık's lawyer, İlter Aksoylu, opposed these requests, he said, "There are so many contradictions that the Gendarmerie Criminal Laboratory is not an ordinary place. The errors were always made in the names. For some reason, there was always an omission or dots were placed in these. The name in the four reports is not in the Gendarmerie's report. We cannot accept this as a human error; it is intentional. There is no need for further investigation. The crime has been revealed by expert reports. We demand that the defendants be punished for acting as experts contrary to the truth."

After the statements were completed, the Prosecutor, when asked for his opinion, requested that the audio recordings be sent first to the Forensic Medicine Institute to resolve the contradictions in the expert reports, that a report be obtained from a committee to be formed at ITU without waiting for the hearing date once the report arrives from there, and that the requests to hear witnesses be rejected at this stage.

The judge decided to send the file in its entirety to the Forensic Medicine Institute with a request for the voices to be examined meticulously using high technology and, if necessary, by twice the number of personnel; for the file to be sent to ITU for examination by a 5-person committee after the report arrives from there; and to reject the requests to hear witnesses, adjourning the hearing to November 27.

After the hearing, father Ethem Büyükışık made a statement in front of the Ankara Courthouse and said the following:

"Today, we wanted to seek justice for a young man who was murdered by being struck in the back with an iron bar while walking home, just 600 meters away, at the age of 26. The defendants rejected the TRT report and requested another one. Since we anticipated that these individuals would do this, we obtained a report from ITU. We proved that they destroyed and obscured evidence, concealed names to protect and shield police officers, and exposed that they provided false testimony. At the stage we have reached, there is nothing left for the defendants to hide behind. We will patiently wait for November 27."

News Source: 12punto