Download
1 / 5
E N D
Oğuzhan Emre PARLAK sworıı Translator- Yeminli Tercüman l hereby ceıtify that l have translaled lhe abOve-menlioned dOc.umenl f rom l[*r.İr,r',. into .Ü,^11'.+l. and the tıanslalıon is lrue anJ acculate lo lhdtest of my abili§ Cacj, No.1 Beyoğlu V D 6760 7610 REPUBLIC OF TURKEY gsKİŞnHİn CRIMINAL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE NO 6 RECORD OF THE HEARING CASE No HEARING DATE HEARING NO JUDGE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR : MEİIMET AKİF AKBAŞ 189493 CLERI( :202|ll482 :0lll3l2022 :1§T : CEREN HEKiM DEMİRCi 1l9I74 : EMİNE cÜı,H.{N ÖzıvrEN fl6356 On the date and time of the hearing, the first hearing began in the hearing hall of Eskisehir Criminal Court of First Instance. The accused, DAVOOD KESHAVARZ, his defense counsel, Att. Ayberk Güntay Öztiirk, and Aff. Öykü Ergtin on behalf of Att. Serdar Durdağı, who is the attomey of the complainant, were present. No one else was present. The public hearing began. The indictment and the decision on the acceptance of the indictment were read. It was understood that the defense counsel had submitted his power of attorney. This was read and put into the file. It was seen that the invitation had been received by the accused. There is a response to the letter for the determination of the economic arıd social situation of the accused. This was read and put into the file. It was understood that the defense counsel had subrnitted a document showing that the accused is a taxpayer in the U.S.A. This was read and put into the file. It was understood that the attomey of the complainant had submitted its certificate of authorization. This was read and put into the file. It was ırnderstood that the attorney of the complainant had submitted his evidence. This was read and put into the file. It was seen that the defense counsel had submitted the documents mentioned in the defense and written defense. These were read and put into the file. Since it was understood that the accused could not speak Turkish, an interpreter-expert was invited. It was understood that the interpreter-expert Tahereh Abbaszadeh Khiaban was present. Her identity was checked. THE INTERPRETER-EXPERT TAIIEREH ABBASZADEH KIIIABAN, daughter of Abbas and Sekine, born in Tabriz on05l28ll981, registered in Iran, still resides at İstiklal Mah. Şair Fuzuli Cad. No:66l3 Odunpazarı/Eskişehir. Her phone number is 0555 104 24 |5. TR ID No: 99147054694. No re-oath was taken under Article 6415 of the Criminal Procedure Law No. 5271 because since she has been appointed ex-officio from the Ankara Regional Expeıt List, she is on the expert list, and the oath had been taken before. The expert was told about his work and asked to fulfill the tasks in the hearing. The expert said, o'I understand the task and I will do it." The accused was brought to the hearing hall and reminded that he was obliged to answer questi0ns about his ıdentıty correctly by means or IhO inıerprelsr. İİis identiıy r,vas çlrçgkçd, THE ACCUSED: DAVOOD KESHAVARZ, TR ID Number: 99710341824, son of EzzaiAllah and Farangis, born in Borujen on 11118/1985, registered in Iran, sti1l resides at Il5 You can actess this documont oı UYAP lıformation §ystem at http://vatanda§,uyaP,gov,tr with 0uGıd6w - GDpSvoh - eoBJlQD _ 36sBE:,
Oğuzhan Emre PARLAK sworn Translator - yeminli Tercüman L No:1 Beyoğlu V.D 5760 761 0 Bahçelievler Mah. Balkan Cad, No:18 İç Kapı No:1 Tepebaşı/Eskişehir. He declares that he is married; he has one child; he is literate in his own language; he is a graphic designer; he has a master's degree; his monthly income is TRY 3,000.00; he has no registered property; he has no criminal record. He is an lranian national. His phone no is 0538 616 52 62. The acts and evidence that are the basis of the accusation corıtained in the indictment and the legal qualification of the accusation were explained under Article l9|l3-b of the Criminal Procedure LawNo. 527|. By means of the irıterpreter-expert, the acçused was informed that he had the right to choose a defense counsel and might benefit from his legal assistance; the defense counsel might be present during his declaration or interrogation; if he could not hire a defense counsel and wanted to benefit from legal assistance, a defense counsel might be appointed for him by the bar association (in case of conviction, the fee of the defense counsel would be considered as a litigation cost); he had the right to silence; he could ask for the collection of concrete evidence to be acquitted from the suspicion, he was given an opporfunity to eliminate the existing suspicions against him and to submit the evidence in favor of him, and the information about his personal and economic situation was received under Article 147 of the Criminal Proçedure LawNo. 527l. Under Article 10612 ofthe Criminal Procedure LawNo. 527|,he was reminded to report the address change to the file by a new address declaration or a registered letter with return receipt if the address mentioned above by him was changed until the end of the criminal proceeding, and he was reminded that all the notices would be sent to the above-mentioned address if he did not comply with this warning. Sinçe it was not required, technicai facilities were not used. In the declaration of the accused made by means of the interpreter-expert, he said "I understood the accusations against me and my legal rights. I have no request for time for my defense and defense counsel. I will make my defense with my defense counsel. I want to be exempted from hearings." It was asked of him through the interpreter-expert: IN THE DEf,,ENSE OF THE ACCUSED TAKEN BY MEAN§ OF THE INTERPRETER-EXPERT, he saidool do not know Turkish. I will do my defense with the translator. I am a graphic designer, and I design. I am a freeiancer. I met the complaint on the internet because of my work. I created designs through the application call,ed SLACK. The complainant was able to enter this application with his own password, and both of us could see the designs that I created through this system. Thsre is no system in which the projects of ttıe complainant are stored. I have been resident in Turkey for 6 years. it is the website named GITHUB that is mentioned in the indictment" This is an application used in the U.S.A. I am registered with this program. Coders are registered there, their codes are also visible to all other users. The correspondence stated in the indictment is not mine. I did not write these messages to the complainant. I do not accept the acçusation." The declarations of the accused in the previous stages were read. It was asked by means of the interpreter-expert: "It is true. I repeat them exactly. If the cornplainant withdraws the complainant, I will accept it." As it is deemed necessary to ask a question by means of the interpreter, the accused answered "The complainant added me to the site named GITHUB. He was the administrator there, and I was able to act as much as the complainant allowed. I was able to act under the control and supervision of the complainant.". The civil registry and criminal record were read to the accused. It was asked by means of the interpreter-expert, he answered "Yes, these are mine". Offİcial documents, documents, reports, statements, declarations, records, and other information and documents in the file were read to the accused. It was asked by means of thE İnteıpreter,expert, hç answerçd "I do not accept the matters whiçh are against me", You çan access this docummt on IJYAP Infmation System at http://vatada,uyap,gov,tr with 0uO+d5ş, - GDpSvOh , eOBJIQD , 36sf3t=, 215
Oğuzhan Emre PARLAK **o,n r,e$xl:ffi mınli Tercüman rorr(!m}@3!frlgı iao -8J;JffiB:trt3,,JiilH?b,, It was asked of the accused by means of the interpreter-expert whether he requested that the provisioırs of the deferment of the announcement of the verdict be applied under Article |0612 of the Criminal Procedure Law No. 527l if ihe crime was proved and again whether he requested that the punishment be substituted for publicly beneficial work under Article 50/1-f of the Tıırkish Penai Code No. 5237 ıf the crime was proved. He said "Yes, I agree, I accept the implementation of the provisions of defemıent of the ıınnouncement of the verdict and the punishment to be substituted for publicly beneficial work if üe Court deems appropriate." It was asked of the attomey of the complainant: She answered *'We do not accept the defense of the accused. The complainant and accused corresponded on Skype. We have submitted these coıTespondences to the file. The receipts about the relation between the accused and complainant are in the case. The accused may flee abroad. We request the Court to impose an internaüonal travel ban on the accused. We complain about üe accused. We request to participate in the case." It was asked of the public prosecutor: He said "I have nothing to add about the received and read documents and declarations made by the parties. I consider that the Court decides to accept üe request for the participation of the attorney of the complainant and refuse the other request, eonsidering that the request of the attomey of the partieipant for the imposition of a judicial control measure on the accused is unnecessary given the situation of the criminal proceeding and the request for the investigation of the IP addıess and S§pe address of the defense counsel is not unreasonable given the evideııce in the file." It was asked of the accused by means of the interpreter-expert: He answered *The Court has üe authority to accept the request to participate. My e-mail address on Slack is " davood. ke shav aru@outlook. com". It was asked of the defense counsel. He answered "We totally agree with the accused's defense. We do not accept the statements of the complainant's attorney. The Court has the authority to accept the request to participate. Firstly, we request the court to exempt our client from hearings. My client did not write the messages on S§pe in the file. The authenticity of these messages has not been approved. For this reason, we request the Court to deliver the case to IT experts in order to make research about which IP addresses, Skype ID, internet networks were used for üese messages. Again, we request detailed research about what actions were sarried out in the program ııagıed GITHUB. When this reseaıch is done, it witl be revealed that my client is innocent. The reason for complaining about my client based on false documents is an agreement of S50,000 between my client and the complainant. This price has not been paid by the complainant. My client doubts the identity of the complainant. The business relationship was terminated by our client because of the loss of confidence. The complainantproduced fake correspondences and complained about our client based on these fake correspondences. we request the collection of evidençe stated by us. Considering the receipts submitted by the complainant's attorney and us, it has been proved that a higher price was paid to my clients. This is proof that my client did not commit the alleged crime. We request that our client be acquiued of the alleged crime." IT HAS BEEN DECREED AND DECLARBD TO: 1-) Refuse the request for the implementation of the judicial control measure on the accused considering the fact that the defense was made and the process of the file; 2-) Refuse the request of the defense counsel for delivering the case to an IT expert considering the evidence in the file; 3) Determine the fee as TRY 300.00 considering the effort and work ofthe interpretet- expert and write a decision to expend; and 4-) Accept the complainant as a participant in this public case based on the probability that thç person is damaged by the çrimç under Artiçle 237 arıd the following articles of the You caı access this documeıt oı UYAP Iıfoımation Systeın 5t http://vatanda§,uyap,gov,t wif 0uüt"d6w , GDpsvoh , € oBJlQD 3l5 - 36sf3E=,
Oğuıhan Emre PARLAK '*o,n r,e§gtffi *"I",*9ffi*i,tr. Beyoğlu V.D, +0 6760 761o n,ı;rerctıman 1, Turkish Penal Code No. 5271 arıd accept Att. Serdar Durdağı as the attorney of the participant in the case and hearings in accordance with the power of attomey. The public hearing continued. The public pro§ecutorwas asked if he requested the extension of inquiry.If not, he wı§ requested to submit his consideration. He said "We do not request the extension of inquiry. When the event and the entire file aıe evaluated together, it is understood that the accused committed the crime of successive blackmail against the participant. We consider and request on behalf of the public that the accused be punished under the provisions of Article l07l1,43ll, arıd 53 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, which complies with his trime." The aüorney of üe participant was asked if she requested the extension of inquiry. If not, she was requested to make her last declarations. She said'oWe repeat our previous written and oral declarations and demand that the defendant be punished. We still complain about him. The defense counsel was asked if he requested the extension of inquiry. If not, he was requested to make his last declarations. He said o'We repeat our previous written and oral defenses. We request that the file be delivered to the IT specialist, as we have just stated the details. However, the Court did not accept it. Again, we have a hard disk in which our client stored all the related data. We can submit this to the Court. The hard disk has a passcode. If it is deemed ne€ essary, we Gan submit the password with a petition We do not aeeept the consideration. We request that our client be acquitted." The hard disk named wd my passport ultra submitted by the defense counsel was received by hand and put into t}ıe file. The accused was asked if he requested the extension of inquiry. If not, he was requested to make his last declarations. He said "I do not accept the evidence and documents submitted by the complainant. I did not write these messages. Also, there is no evidence about that. I repeat my previous defenses exactly. I do not accept the consideration. I want to be acquitted." The accused was asked if he had any last words. He said "The complainant does not live in Turkey. If I get acquitted in this case, how can I complain about him?" The case was examined. It was understood that there was nothing else to be investigated. The public hearing ended. V§RDICT: Considering the above_mentioned justiiications, it is decreed on behalf of tlre Turkistı natiorı, in the presence of the accused, deferşe counsel, participant's attorney, and public prosecutor and the absence of the participant, in accordance with the consideration of üe public prosecutor: (1) To SENTENCE TI{E ACCUSED To 1 YEAR,S IMPRISONMENT AND IMPOSE A PUNITIVE FINE OF 5 DAYS ON HIM under Articles 61 and l07l1 ofthe Turkish Penal Code no. 5237 considering the intensity ofthe accused's intention and how the crime was commitied because it is understood that the accused, I)avood Keshavatz, committed the crime of successive blackmail against üe participant Devakumarın Jaşwant Kumar, (2) To increase the punishmentby |l4 under Article 5214 of the Turkish Penal Code no. 5237 , SENTENCE THE ACCUSED To l YEAR AND 3 MONTHS, IMPRISONMENT AND IMPOSE A PUMTIVE FINE OF 6 DAYS ON HIM considering that the accused committed the crime in a successive way, (3) To decrease the punishment by l/6 under Article 62l|-2 of the Turkish Penal Code ıo. 5237, SENTENCE THE ACCUSED TO 1 YEAR AI\[D 15 DAYS' IMPRISOI{MENT AltD IMPOSE A PUNITIVE FINE OF'5 DAYS ON HIM considering the possible negative effects of the sentencing on the future of the accused, (4) TO DETERMINE the pıınitive frne as TRY 20.00 for one day and as TRY 100.00 for 5 days consideling the economic and social stafus of the accused under Article 5211-2-3 of the Twkish Penal Codç no. 5237, You çan aççeşs Üiş doçument on UYAP Iıformatioı §ystom at http://vatanda§.uyap.8ov.tr wiü 0u0+d6w - GDp§roh - € OBıQD - 36sfJE=, 415
(5) NOT TO APPLY Article 52/4 of the Turkish Penal Code no. 5237 to the accused considering the economic and social stafus of the accused and warn the accused about the application of Article 106/3 of the Law no. 5275, amended by Article 8l of the Law no. 6545 on 0612812014, in case of non-payment of a criminal fine (the accused was warned by means of the interpreter), (6) APPLY the paragraphs 1, 2, and 3/l of the Turkish Penal Code no.5237 to the accused, considering the annulment decision dated l0l08l20l5 of the Constitutiona] Court and the amendment by Article 10 of the Law no 7242 entered into force 04ll5l2020, (7) NOT TO DEFER the announcement of the verdict under Article 231 of the Code of criminal procedure no. 527l because the conditions axe not met and the aruıorıncement of üe verdict about the accused has been deferred in the criminal case with case no 20201238 arıd decision no202ll|72 of the Criminal Court of First Instance no 2 of Eskişehir, (8) SUSPEIıID the sentence of imprisonmg6 imposed on the accused under Article 5l of the Turkish penal code no.5237 because the court is convinced that the accused would not commit such a crime again in the future due to his regret in the hearings and üe fact that t}ıe accused had not been conviçted and sentenced to imprisonment for more than 3 monüs of an intentional erime, and his regret in the hearings; IMPOSE A PROBATION PERIOD OF' 1 YEAR Al[D 2 MONTHS for üe accused under Article 51/3 of the Turkish Penal Code no.5237, NOT TO IMPOSE any obligation or ASSIGN an expert for the probation period considering the personalıty and social status of the accused under Article 5116 of the Turkish Penal Code no. 5237, (9) INI'ORM the Criminal Court of First Instance no 2 of Eskişehir when the verdict is finalized because it is understood that the announcement of the verdict about the accused has been deferred in the criminal case with case no 20201238 and decision no 20211172 and the accused committed a crime during his probation period according to the criminal record of the accused, (10) COLLECT the attorney's fee of TRY 5,100.00 calculated under the Attomey's Fee Minimum Tariffof 2022,wtichis in force at the date of the verdict, from the accused and GIVE this amount to the participant because the latter is represented by an attorney, (11) STORE 1 wd my passport ulta hard disk and a coıuıection cable, which are registered in the file numbercd2022l239 of the Propeğ and Evidence Unit ofthe Chief Public Prosecutor Office of Eskişehiı, A§ EYIDENCE IN THE'. FILE, (12) COLLECT TRY 31.50 FROM THE ACCUSED, which is for the expense of 2 notifications paid by the State, and REGISTER it as revenue, without including the fee of the interpreter assigned for üe accused who does not speak Turkish under Article 32415 of the Code of Criminal Procedure no.527l, (13) SEND to the relevant judicial law unit the defender-defendant decision tracking form filled after the finalization of the verdict together with a copy of the finalized verdict. The verdict was clearly read and duly explained. The accused and participant may APPEAL against the verdict before the Our court or through a petition or a declaration written by a clerk, approved by a judge, and submitted to the Criminal Court of First Instance of his place of residence within 7 days from the pronorıncement of the verdict. 0|ll3l2022 Judge ll9l74 Clerk 126356 *This document hu been signed with an electronk signaiure under Law No. 5070. oÖuzhan Emre PARLAK s*"oln1?".İİ",İ-,'-ffiinıiTercüman thg abov_e,nientioned doeumeni -.İ,ffi.tffi"i,-t,, ilı,l,-,mffi},,;:,H,,i;fl;:h-ı,li Beyoğlu V,D, 2ş0 67ş0 7610 You can access this doeument on UYAP lnfonnation System at http://vatandas.uyap.gov.tr with 0u0+d6w - GDpSvoh , eoBİQD , 36sf38=. l hereby certify that l have tranglated 5l5
