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...

Don't leave your news choices to an algorithm - decide for yourself what you read. Add 12punto to your preferred sources! Don't leave your news to an algorithmYou decide which source to read; add 12punto to your preferred sources.

How pro-government media covered the Dilruba verdict

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."