|
Justified acquittal verdict for the 6 suspects in the case held by 2ND High Criminal Court |
T.C.
TRIAL TRANSCRIPT FILE NO: 2006/26
PRESIDENT JUDGE: SALİH ÖZTÜRK 20709 The 9th hearing was opened on mentioned date and time. It was understood that lawyers Kerim Kalkan and Fatih Doğan did not object to the court’s decision of declining the appeals of defendants Serdar Dayanık and Erkan Seyhan about the recusation of President Judge Salih Öztürk. It was seen that Demet Karakale, Hülya Şeref, Semin Babuna, İlhan Ulaşoğlu, H. Can Akıncıoğlu, Sevil Tuncer, Fatma Emel Tezyapar, Ünal Uyguç, Türkan Akyüzalp, Necdet Akyüzalp had sent petitions to the case file in between the hearings It was understood that the file includes a petition signed by Defendant Erkan Seyhan asking for the prohibition of the attendance of Organized Crimes Subdivision staff to the hearing. A petition stating that the defense lawyers A.Ulvi Çağıran, Fatih M. Doğan and Kerim Kalkan’s withdrawals from defending the defendant Serdar Dayanık was submitted, and a also petition for excused absence was sent by the defense lawyer of the defendant Serdar Dayanık, Kerim İşcan. Complainant attorneys Rezzan Aydınoğlu and Nalan Kuğuoğlu said: We are complainant of the defendant Mehmet Ali Bahadır and the formation. We have no complaints about the other 5 defendants mentioned in the indictment. Our plea for attendance in the law suit as intervening party still applies in respect of defendant Mehmet Ali. We do not have the demand for intervening the case of the other 5 defendants. Our demand for attendance is in respect of our client Ebru Şimşek. We are also attorneys of complainant Banu Akıncıoğlu. However the plea of that person for being an intervening party in the case was declined since she had not submitted a complaint before and since she had withdrew her complaint. Present defendants and defense lawyers said: that they leave the decision of becoming an intervening party of the case, to the court’s inititative. Public Prosecutor said: Since the present attorneys of the intervening party stated that they are not complainant of defendants except for the absconder Mehmet Ali Bahadır Güven and that they gave in being the intervening party for the lawsuit except for this defendant, it is demanded for the intervening of the lawsuit to continue for the absconder defendant in respect of article 237 and following articles under Code of Criminal Procedure, for the other present defendants, it is demanded to annul the intervening party’s and their attorney’s such title, and since the defendant Serdar Dayanık’s defense lawyers withdrew from the case and defense lawyer Kerim İşcan, who took over his position, submitted a petition on 22.1.2007 and demanded completion of the procedure in favor of defendants and the acceptance of his excused absence in the hearing and since there is no clarification if an additional time is asked for the defense in respect of this defendant, the acceptance of his absence is requested. IT IS DISCUSSED AND HELD AS REQUESTED: It was unanimously decided;
Intervening party’s attorneys Rezzan Aydınoğlu and Nalan Kuğuoğlu said: Such formations constitute an obstacle for the formation of independent minds, and are in breach of 2nd Article of the Turkish Constitution. We hereby demand a decision to punish the defendants. Lawyer Rezzan Aydınoğlu submitted a written petition containing her written demand consisting of two pages. It was received, read and placed in the file. Public Prosecutor said: We reiterate the same statement given at the hearing dated 17.11.2006. However, we hereby demand to take into account that the reclaimant and intervening party’s attorneys’ demand of attendance is in respect of the absconder defendant only. The statement of the Republic Prosecutor was read. Defendant Erkan Seyhan said: I reiterate my statement given at the hearing dated 3.7.2006 about the case. Science Research Foundation did not compose a gang that commits crime. The allegations were put forward against us by means of pressure exerted by press and political powers. I hereby request a verdict of acquittal. He submitted his defense petition of 109 pages concerning the basis of the case. It was received and placed in the case file. He also defended himself verbally. Defendant Semih Selman Marangozoğlu: He submitted his defense petition of 6 pages concerning the basis of the case and it has been seen that he requested a verdict of acquittal. Defendant Nuri Özbudak said: There is not any offense nor an offender. There is not a single concrete evidence regarding the alleged offense in the file. I request a verdict for my acquittal. He defended himself verbally. Defendants’ defense lawyer Kerim Kalkan said: In order for the offence stated in the 313th article of the Criminal Code numbered 765 to be commissioned, the accused should come together to commit a crime. The file does not contain any concrete evidences regarding commitment of such an offense. Science Research Foundation is body that undertakes cultural activities. I hereby request a verdict of acquittal for the defendants Nuri Özbudak, Semih Salman Marangozoğlu and Erkan Seyhan since their alleged offenses are not conclusively established. Defendants’ defense lawyer Fatih Doğan said: I agree with Kerim Kalkan’s statements. There are no acts of coercion in question, committed by the defendants present here, whose defense counseling I had undertaken. On as-is basis, none of the stipulations mentioned under the article 192 of Turkish Criminal Code numbered 765 have been formed. All evidences are collected in the file. At this point, I do not agree with the Public Prosecutor’s opinion asking for the delay regarding article 192 in pursue of the law numnbered 4616. Article 229 in Code of Criminal Proceedings also supports my claim. I hereby request a verdict of acquittal for the defendants. I am not standing as defense lawyer of Bülent Tatlıcan and Serdar Dayanık. Defendants Erkan Seyhan, Semih Selman Marangozoğlu and Nuri Özbudak were given their last right to speak: President Judge |
