No Ballistic-DNA-Fingerprint Inspection. That Night, Non-Military Ammunition Was Used

Ballistic Examinations Not Performed Properly, Forensic Medicine Reports Not Completed

Considering that guns and ammunition were distributed to civilians by the police around the General Staff Headquarters on the night of 15 July, it is understood that guns of different sizes were fired by the police and civilian citizens in the headquarters area. In addition, it has been determined from the footage and radio speech transcripts that cutting and injuring weapons were brought and used by the citizens who came to the region.

Considering all these issues, it is necessary to carefully re-examine the hospital reports regarding each victim and injured person on the night of 15 July, complete the Forensic Medicine Institute reports regarding each individual, and complete the sequences of perpetrator, gun, bullet, wound, injured, location and time.

In firearm injuries, it is of great importance to determine from which direction and level the shot was fired, at what time and from which weapon the wound occurred, the nature of the wound, and the technical characteristics of the firearm. In this context, while it was possible to examine the effects caused by the shootings such as the type of the shell holding the bullet, the traces left in the sleeve of the shooter, the gunpowder traces on the clothes of the injured person, the entry and exit holes of the bullet in the body, the hit ring, the direction of the bullet entering the body and the course it follows in the body, unfortunately most of these examinations were not made for the victims in the case.

No DNA and Fingerprint Analyzes were Performed on the Weapons of the Suspects

When we examine the actions to be taken regarding firearm injuries within the scope of the file, as of the afternoon of 16 July 2016, taking the personnel at the headquarters into custody has been completed. There is nothing preventing the prosecution and law enforcement officers after this time. However, it is understood from the content of the file that most of the processes listed above were not done or were done incompletely.

No swaps have been taken of anyone detained as a suspect, no forensic examinations have been carried out on their hand and face areas, and no work has been done to detect their clothes and gunshot residues. The suspect and the weapon he used were not matched. Fingerprints, DNA tissue analysis and other analyzes were not performed on these weapons.

Ballistic Investigations Left Inconclusive

As stated above, since the weapon used by the accused was not matched during the investigation phase, the match between the bullet and the weapon that fired it could not be made. In other words, the ballistic examination remained inconclusive.

Considering the news that appeared in the media about the distribution of weapons to the public that night, and the evidence showing that only the personnel in the headquarters were not armed that night (such as the policemen who entered with guns), perhaps the defendants did not benefit from these analyzes, which would yield results in favor of the defendants, and the emergence of the material truth was prevented.

Pursuant to Article 160 of the CMK, in order to investigate the material truth and conduct a fair trial, the Public Prosecutor is obliged to collect and preserve the evidence in favor and against the suspect and protect the rights of the suspect by means of the judicial law enforcement officers under his command. In this context, the prosecution jeopardized the ability of a fair trial in the case, as it could not ensure that a firearm and weapons, which may be the most important evidence of injury, are preserved as evidence.

The Military Doesn't Have Armor-Piercing Ammunition, But Police Snipers Have

Only two of the victims have HTS base information, and two victims have no HTS record found report. In other words, the fact that only 2 victims were found around the General Staff headquarters was supported by HTS. Although it was accepted by the prosecution that the deceased Yusuf Çelik was shot by the personnel of the tank battalion, in the reasoned decision of the Ankara 18th High Criminal Court dated 9 April 2018, it was decided to punish a defendant for the crime of willfully killing Yusuf Çelik.

It was determined in the ballistics specialist reports that the foreign object removed from the body of the deceased Mustafa Avcu in his autopsy was steel armor-piercing ammunition. There is no weapon using this type of ammunition at the General Staff headquarters.

The same ammunition was recovered from the body of Yakup Başıbüyük, who was killed in the operation carried out against the personnel alleged to have participated in the coup attempt at the Gendarmerie General Command in Beştepe. In the operations conducted here, this type of ammunition was used by the police in sniper weapons.

In addition, there is a suspicious episode of 1 hour and 11 minutes on Mustafa Avcu's HTS that could not be recorded. In other words, it can be evaluated that Mustafa Avcu was either shot by a sniper stationed outside the General Staff Headquarters or he was shot in Beştepe.

An entry wound of 6x5 cm was found in the autopsy of deceased Celalettin İbiş. This wound is an entry wound that cannot be opened with light weapons.

When the files of the other victims are examined, it is seen that there is generally no information about how and where they were killed other than the non-essential statements of their relatives.

There are contradictions in the witness statements of Bülent Aydın and Resul Kaptancı. The place and time of the incident are not clear. As a result of ballistic, criminal, swap, fingerprint, tissue DNA analysis, biological and chemical analyzes and crime scene investigations and deficiencies in these, no match of perpetrator, weapon, bullet, wound, injured, reasonable place and time could be made for any injured victim. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to show that any of the victims were shot by the defendants.

In this case, it was determined that the footage of the incident was examined and that Rear Admiral Sinan Sürer did not shoot, according to both the expert report and the statements of the accused and witnesses. As a result, it was revealed that the ballistic report confirmed the statement of Rear Admiral Sinan Sürer.

As a result, there is not sufficient evidence for the defendants in the case to be punished for willful homicide, since no examination was carried out in a way that would leave no room for doubt for any of the victims and injured persons whose names were mentioned in the indictment. The defendants were unlawfully punished without detailed examination and analysis of all injured and deceased persons and without hearing the statements of the individuals before the court who witnessed the events.

Penalizing the suspect in an event where the perpetrator, gun, bullet, wound, injured, victim or the time sequence is not fully formed means a violation of the universal principle that the accused benefits from suspicion. In such a situation, punishment does not mean that justice has been served neither for the victim nor the perpetrator. If an innocent person is punished, it will lead to two victimizations carried out by the judicial authority.

Dilaver Derviş

* It was prepared with the help of the defense of Major Abdurrahim Aksoy, a member of the Special Forces Command.