Supreme Court Decision On The Crime Of Looting

03 Jan Supreme Court Decision On The Crime Of Looting

T.C SUPREME COURT
6.Criminal Division
Main: 2016/ 2213
Decision: 2018 / 7269
Decision Date: 27.11.2018

The sentence given by the Local Court was appealed; the file was discussed according to the nature of the application, type of punishment, duration and date of crime:

Other appeals have not been seen in place.

But;

1) participating in …’s, among them the wife in a divorce because of discord with the witness before leaving the Sultanbeyli district in the period they lived together in the residence in joint family, is located in the same neighborhood they did on credit from the store employee and the witness also, about 2 years ago and left due to the settlement of the province of residence participating in the common witness than the accused that it would take the owner who wants …’s economic status upon failure to pay the debt of the unavailable witness, in contact with the attendee, however, has accused citing various excuses s, that’s what you are tanık…in the accused, who is his older brother … is also known by the victim, who came to the Sultanbeyli district in the hope of making peace with his wife on 04.07.2014 …witness…in time for the residence of the accused … ; 23.00 come to the waters, without a positive outcome from his meeting with the defendant and his brother, the victim of the defendant’s home at midnight upon separation from the defendant, witness, the accused …’phone and E of the victim …’s coming to town and was giving news about might be able to collect a debt, a debt to be able to collect the appropriate conditions in order to provide the accused …’s brother-in-law and which participate in them, he wanted to go to a park to talk once more, the victim described himself Park

after this stage, when the defendant arrived, he met with the witness and his brother-in-law. tanık…in leaving the scene,

The defendant …’s not paying the debt left behind by the victim wants to pay, upon a negative response from the victim, the accused …’s to collect a debt, the accused …’s, then continues in time as the marriage, family maintenance obligations and payment conditions in the economy already damaged and fail in retrospective sisters…who have to get rid of the debt, the victim was forced into a car on a time reaches when they were beaten with the hands, the accused …’s, throwing down with the suspension bridge threatened the victim with a mobile phone that belongs to 3 bank card with money received 140.00 GBP, they attempted to withdraw money from the ATM, but returned the cards to the victim when they were not successful due to the lack of money in the accounts.; 01.30 water jumped out of the vehicle and fled to the police, accompanied by police teams as a result of the investigations, the same night at 02.20 hours in the cruising stopped … both defendants were caught in the vehicle numbered license plate, the defendant … ‘ s, during the top search, the pants pocket with 140 TL money removed from the crime subject mobile phone handed to the police officers;

The defendant … ‘ s actions and rhetoric, the crime of looting requiring a lesser punishment and 5237 TCK No. 150/1. considering that it constitutes the remaining crimes under Article 150/1 of the TCK. according to the article, the same law should be established in accordance with articles 86/2 and 106/2-c, without regard to the fact that the provision should be made, making an error in the legal nature of the crime, on the spot and on the grounds that it is not sufficient to decide in writing,

2) by acceptance;

a-a defendant caught by law enforcement …with a mobile phone that was the subject of a crime that was seized in a top search for $ 140. when he pulled the money out of his pocket and handed it over, the TCK had 168. do not assume that the effective conditions of regret provided for in the article cannot be mentioned,

B-53 of the TCK, which is the natural result of the sentence of conviction. article on the Constitutional Court, 24.11.2015 Day published in the Official Gazette and entered into force 08.10.2015 day, 2014/140 basis, 2015/85 with the decision to cancel the resulting change must be re-evaluated at the place of decision,

As the appeal of the defendant’s defense was considered in this regard, it was decided unanimously on 27/11/2018 that the provision be overturned in accordance with the request for the reasons described.