The reasoned decision for the aggravated life sentence handed down to Tuğyan Ülkem Gülter regarding the death of singer Gül Tut, known as “Güllü,” who lost her life after falling from a window in Yalova, has been announced.
In the 25-page decision by the Yalova 1st High Criminal Court, witness statements, camera footage, expert reports, and other evidence in the file were evaluated together. The court ruled that Gülter was guilty of the “intentional killing of a woman and an ascendant.”
Gül Tut lost her life on September 26, 2025, after falling from the window of her home in a 6-story building on Vali Akı Street in the Harmanlar neighborhood of Yalova’s Çınarcık district. Following the incident, Gülter and Sultan Nur Ulu, who was in the house that night, were detained; Gülter was arrested on December 13, 2025, on charges of “intentional killing.” A house arrest order was issued for Ulu.
Following the investigation, a lawsuit was filed against Gülter for “premeditated intentional killing of an ascendant.” In the hearing on October 9, the court sentenced the defendant to aggravated life imprisonment and decided that her detention should continue.
COURT EVALUATED WITNESS TESTIMONY AND RECORDINGS
The reasoned decision stated that only Gül Tut, Tuğyan Ülkem Gülter, and Sultan Nur Ulu were in the house at the time of the incident. It was noted that upon examination of camera footage from the apartment and the surrounding area, it was determined that no one other than these three people had entered or left the house throughout the day before the incident and until the time of death.
The court relied on the testimony given in court by Sultan Nur Ulu, who was considered the sole eyewitness to the event. According to the decision, Ulu stated that Gül Tut came into the room, and while she (Ulu) turned to the mirror, she saw Gülter grab her mother by the upper thigh from behind and throw her out the window. Ulu’s initial statements, in which she claimed not to have seen the moment of the fall, were evaluated in light of her explanation that she was afraid the defendant would harm her and blame her for the crime.
The decision stated that there was no concrete reason for hostility that would require Ulu to slander the defendant, that there were no other eyewitnesses in the room where the incident occurred, and that the witness’s statements regarding her fear were supported by other accounts in the file.
In the evaluation of the camera footage, it was reported that Gül Tut entered the bathroom around 01:22 on September 26, 2025, left at 01:23:58, said “Is everyone ready?” and then headed to her daughter’s room. It was stated that around 01:26:37, following the fall, Gülter and Ulu headed toward the house’s front door and the stairs in a panic.
Expert reports noted that the two people in the room were in close proximity to Gül Tut during the incident, that no sudden reflexive scream was heard after the sound of the fall, and that physical findings regarding how the incident occurred were examined. The decision also included that no residue was found in the criminal investigation conducted following the claim that there was a substance in the room that provided slipperiness.
Forensic Medicine Institute reports stated that there was no medical evidence that Gül Tut died of poisoning; the death occurred as a result of severe bodily trauma due to a fall from a height, fractures, brain hemorrhage, and internal bleeding caused by internal organ injuries.
DOUBT EVALUATION REGARDING THE CRIME OF PREMEDITATION
The court concluded that it could not be fully determined with the evidence in the file when the defendant decided in advance and definitively to kill her mother. For this reason, it was ruled that the conditions for the crime of premeditated killing were not met, in accordance with the principle that “the defendant benefits from doubt.”
However, the court decided that in light of witness statements, camera footage, expert reports, and other evidence, it was proven that Tuğyan Ülkem Gülter intentionally killed her mother, Gül Tut. No discretionary reduction was applied to the defendant.
It was reported that the decision can be appealed to the Bursa Regional Court of Justice within 2 weeks from the notification of the reasoned judgment.
Gülter’s lawyer, Merve Uçanok, announced that they would appeal the decision. Arguing that the conviction was largely based on the statement of Sultan Nur Ulu, Uçanok said, “This decision is against the law. We will use all our rights to apply to higher legal authorities. Justice is not just believing one account, but demonstrating that that account is verified by concrete evidence and has reached a certainty that cannot be explained otherwise.”
News Source: 12punto
