FACTS FOUND BY THE STATEMENTS OF THE CLIENT/WITNESSES IN THE TRT EVENTS

Another July 15 anniversary has arrived. It's the anniversary of the occupation of the lives of thousands of families and children by a few gangs that masquerade as the state. It is the anniversary of the burdening of the results of a trap on innocent Turkish Armed Forces personnel, housewives, teachers, and so on.

The people of this country are now talking about who had been armed and prepared for the massacre that would have taken place on July 15 and that weekend, either through the mouths of some names who left AKP for political reasons or the leaders of the criminal organizations. People now realize that with just an order of Hulusi Akar, soldiers could have been saved from being trapped under the name of resisting a terrorist attack, and 250 citizens could have been prevented from losing their lives.

In order to illuminate all this, we have given examples from the statements of a small number of soldiers who have been subjected to unlawfulness until today.

In our next news series, benefitting from the information gathered, expressed, and explained in the defense of the Regiment Commander Colonel Kutsi Barış in the Presidential Guard Regiment Case and using the testimonies of people who were heard as witnesses/complainants, we will try to address what happened around the TRT building and what kind of a trap the soldiers were put into on July 15.

LOOK AT THE COUNTRY ROBBED BEHIND, NOT AT THOSE WHO SAY “LOOK AT THE ACROBAT”

Just like the visuals in a show that are shown to make us all believe in a story; everyone only saw the pictures of soldiers changing their uniforms and trying to have a leaflet read in the TRT building. But what really happened there, what were the observations of the TRT staff and security guards; nobody could read them in the press.

In the Presidential Guard Regiment case, with the statements of the complainants and witnesses, which started in September 2019, the events related to the TRT leg of July 15 came to light. The facts that emerged showed anyone who wants to understand it once again what kind of a ploy the 15th of July was.

The facts that have emerged have emerged despite the "abnormal sensitivity" and "interventions" of the court to protect the complainants and witnesses.

In the file, there are three groups of complainants:

“Those who claimed to have been injured and battered on the night of the incident”—these are 12 people, 9 civilians and 3 police officers,

“Those who work as private security at TRT” and

“TRT employees.”

The complainants, who received a veteran's certificate and claimed that they were injured and battered on the evening of the incident, went to tell a purposeful fiction instead of expressing what happened.

THE EFFECT OF FEAR AND STRAIN ENVIRONMENT WAS FEELED ON THE STATEMENTS OF THE CLIENTS

It was observed by everyone in the court hall that the complainants, most of whom were TRT employees, were primarily afraid of losing their jobs, and that they were worried about being arrested as a result of their statements. The state and statements of the complainants also summarize the abnormal fear and oppression the country was in.

During the statements and especially with the questions asked to the complainants in the cross-examination, despite the court's excessive interventions that cannot even be considered as protecting the complainants, and despite the fact that the complainants were not asked many questions, the contradictions in the constructs of some complainants became obvious with the answers received from them.

The court's overreaction to the questions asked about the night of the incident that might reveal the purely material truth,

Its interventions to the questions asked to the complainants and its statements that guide the complainants before the complainants answer,

Despite the absence of any objections from the complainants and their lawyers, its attitude of "You do not answer this question" has revealed the embodied state of the belief that an impartial trial has not been made.

In such an important case, this attitude of the court, which should be satisfied with the questions asked to the complainants in order to reveal the material truth, has been recorded as a behavior that needs explanation.

The court, which has the authority to "make a decision" after listening to all parties, opposed asking questions freely to the complainants and directed the complainants with an overprotective attitude. This attitude needs explanation.

During the statements, despite the obvious contradictory and self-denying statements of the complainants, the court remained indifferent and did not consider complainants’ statements as contempt of the court. The only consolation left was that the expressions were recorded on camera.

Those sitting in the defendant's chair and on the defense side of the case waited for the SEGBIS Solutions to be delivered to them as soon as possible, "without intervention" and "complete", because many times in these cases, SEGBIS Solutions were sent with "corrections" and "some removals".