Striking Allegation Against Denizbank CEO Hakan Ateş from Rezan Epözdemir, Who Was Subject to a Criminal Complaint by the Bank!

The fraud case in which former Denizbank Branch Manager Seçil Erzancollected money from many people in the worlds of football and business under the name of the 'Fatih Terim Fund' with promises of high returns continues to remain on Turkey's agenda.

Following the statements made regarding the case by Rezan Epözdemir, Rezan Epözdemir, who represents some of the footballers claiming to have been defrauded by Erzan, Denizbank made a move.

"A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT WILL BE FILED"

In the bank's statement, "A complaint will be filed with the bar association to which this person belongs, and a criminal complaint will be filed with the Public Prosecutor's Office, regarding this individual who considers every path to a goal legitimate, wanders around television channels with pieces of paper he knows are irrelevant, and acts to manipulate public perception through the media by smearing the name of DenizBank, based on his baseless and fact-distorting statements as in the previous period, and his expressions that are the subject of the aforementioned denial text." it was stated.

A HIGHLY DISCUSSED ALLEGATION FROM REZAN EPÖZDEMİR

Following Denizbank's criminal complaint announcement, Rezan Epözdemir made highly discussed allegations in a post on his social media account.

"Denizbank CEO Hakan Ateş sent me a message through a client of mine who is in the tourism industry, saying he would finish me off and have an investigation opened against me. He has pressured the bosses of certain media outlets, with whom he has credit and commercial relationships and whose employees receive their salaries through the aforementioned bank, to prevent me from appearing on broadcasts and to have them publish news in favor of Denizbank. He has pressured me to withdraw from the case by making requests to very important figures in the business world whom I cannot refuse. There are records, documents, and information regarding these matters.

My clients and those familiar with the matter also know all the details. Ultimately, the statement made before tomorrow's hearing, and the censorship and pressure applied to me, have the sole purpose of exerting psychological pressure for me to withdraw from the case and to manipulate public opinion. Such statements and pressures will have no effect on me, as I have represented victimized families in many cases that have become public knowledge and have encountered these before; our legal struggle will continue until the end for the completion of the legal process, for all perpetrators responsible for the incident to be held legally accountable, for justice to be served, and for the material truth to emerge. Regarding this statement and the applications made, I will file a complaint against Denizbank officials for slander under Article 267 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) and for defamation under TCK Article 125/1/2/4, and I will apply to the necessary legal channels. I respectfully submit this to the information of the public. Attorney Dr. Rezan Epözdemir, Counsel for some of the Complainants"

HE MADE ANOTHER POST

In another post, Epözdemir used the following expressions:

"The press release made by Denizbank is clearly contrary to the truth, devoid of legal basis, baseless, and aimed at manipulating public opinion. In the hearing dated 12.01.2024, in accordance with Article 201 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CMK), we asked direct questions to the defendant Seçil Erzan as we are the counsel for the intervening party. In this context, we asked about her message exchange dated 28.01.2023 with her relative Tanın Yılmaz, and asked questions such as 'Who is the one taking the world, who is taking 50%? Who are numbers 3 and 4?'. When she said that the person on the other side of the conversation was her spouse and siblings, the entire courtroom and the complainants laughed because the answer given was contrary to the rules of logic. Upon this, we asked about the news and photos in the 'Quality' magazine, which is in open sources, dated 03.02.2023, 5 days after the mentioned conversation, showing Hakan Ateş and a group from the business world with their spouses at the time the conversation took place, and asked whether the person referred to was Hakan Ateş. This news and the photos in open sources were also submitted to the file. We asked: Who is taking 50%? Who is getting rich? Who are numbers 3 and 4? Since the prosecution is public, the press members inside also reported this question. We also stated that it is quite clear who is actually meant here. The panic experienced in the face of this question is because, from the beginning of the process, we have argued that this incident is embezzlement, that it is a legal absurdity that Hakan Ateş's statement was not taken even as a witness, let alone as a suspect, despite the claim of 12 complainants and dozens of pieces of evidence; because we filed an appeal for the benefit of the law against the decision given regarding this crime and an individual application to the Constitutional Court (AYM); because we filed a complaint against Hakan Ateş and other bank executives for concealing, destroying, and altering evidence of crime and for deprivation of liberty, as Seçil Erzan explained in detail in her statement dated 02.05.2023; because we applied to the administrative court for the cancellation of the Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency (BDDK) decision; and because we are effectively following this process legally, this malicious statement has been made with hostile attitudes and for the purpose of applying psychological pressure.

The real questions that Mr. Hakan Ateş and Denizbank need to answer in this process are as follows.

1) If they have no involvement in the incident,

why did they keep Seçil Erzan in custody for two days according to her own statement dated 02.05.2023? Did they direct her statement?

2) Did they break her phone and give her a new one?

3) They submitted both of her phones to the file themselves through their lawyers. What are the defendant's phones doing in the hands of the lawyers?

4) Likewise, why did they take the camera recordings to the general directorate on April 10 and deliver them to the financial branch on April 28? 18

days, what did they do with the camera recordings?

5) The expert report states that these recordings were deleted, the times do not match, and they were tampered with? Who deleted these recordings?

6) While Seçil Erzan's conversations with everyone are included in the WhatsApp conversation logs, why are there nocorrespondences with bank executives?

7) Is the person who prepared the one-sided report of the bank's inspection board also a suspect in the file of concealing evidence of crime and deprivation of liberty pending at the prosecutor's office? If so, how is this an objective report?

8) What is the fate of the ongoing investigations on this matter? These are exactly the questions that need to be answered"

News Source: 12punto