02 Mar THE MAIN THING IS THAT THE PERSEVERANCE IS THE INSTRUCTION GIVEN – THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
T.C. COURT OF CASSATION 1. CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT
Mainly No:2014/6118
Decision No:2015/3222
Decision Date:
Communiqué No: 1 – 2013/332054
COURT : Adana 4. High Criminal Court
DATE AND NO: 02/05/2013, 2012/239(E) and 2013/244(K)
CRIME : Qualified manslaughter, aiding in this crime
The collected evidence is examined at the place of the verdict, accused .. he’s underage .. a child who was dragged into a crime with a crime of premeditated murder.. the defendant accepts the extent of his action, in accordance with its occurrence and the outcome of the investigation .. the criminal has been assigned a qualification, the reason for the reduction of the discretion has been appreciated, the defense has been evaluated on convincing grounds; the defendants
… it has been accepted and appreciated that the evidence obtained about him for the crime of intentionally helping to kill the victim is not of sufficient quality and degree of conviction in accordance with Article 223/2-e of the CMK, and according to the file under review, there is no inaccuracy except for reasons of violation of the provisions given to the defendant.. as for the defendants who were acquitted of the defense counsel, the quality, the self-defense, the attorney who participated in the subuta, the defendants.. with the rejection of any other appeal that is considered to be unqualified, admirable and out of place;
1- The accused .. about the victim .. the conviction established for intentional homicide and officially subject to appeal, as well as the acquittals established for the crimes of helping to intentionally kill the victim about the defendants, shall be upheld as thought in the communique;
But,
2- A child who has previously committed a crime, they are working with in the same office with the victim between them can not be certain of who started it for a reason, a discussion about three weeks ago from the day of the event are experiencing, therefore a child who has committed a crime drawn from the work of Elijah, therefore, occurs when the antagonism between them, the day of the event a few days ago, was characterized by discussion between them again and the victim who has committed a crime, injured in simple way … a child, a child who has committed a crime on the day of the event … friends with the other defendants due to events that happened between them before his death, taking him in order to intimidate, the accused, who went to the workplace where the victim worked, waited for the decedent to leave work, the child Elijah, who was dragged into the crime before the decedent left work, went to him and took him to the alley saying “come and talk to you”, where a fight broke out between the two, essentially one of those who came to the scene to give the deceased an eye … in the event that he stabbed him in the chest area as indicated in the autopsy report and caused his death,
a) The november of Elijah, the child who was dragged into the crime, is not the murder of the victim, but the beating. To this end, the defendant .. and he brought the others to the scene. However, the defendant … went outside the instructions given to him instead of the tattoo … stabbed him to death.
In this case,.. although he should be punished in accordance with Article 87/4 of the first sentence of the TCK No. 5237 for murder as a result of injuries exceeding caste, since his perseverance is aimed at beating, he cannot be held directly responsible for killing people, but he must be convicted as a person who has been mistaken in the nature of a crime and helped to commit a november murder crime,
b) It is not clear who initiated the events that occurred earlier between the decedent and the child dragged into the crime, as well as according to witness statements, unfair incitement provisions about the child dragged into the crime due to the act of the victim causing an unfair incitement in the form of beating the child dragged into the crime before the incident
article 29 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 5237, which regulates determination of excess penalties by not observing the requirement for a minimum discount in accordance with the article,
c – Murder victim or helping the victim to the defendant intentionally hurt you for sure beyond doubt that a believable material evidence cannot be obtained, although instead of granting the acquittal of defendants yanilgili establishment of evaluation in writing with the provision of conviction;
To break it done until now, a child who has committed a crime, the defendant and the defendant’s appeal in the appellate petition and the hearing of the objections of review in place are observed, therefore, because contrary to the provisions of thinking in tebligname (CORRUPTION), cause destruction, and considering the time they spend in prison, the child who has committed a crime by deliberately to help kill the evacuation of the crimes and the defendant, convicted or detained for any other crime if they are not to be released to the public prosecutor of the Supreme Court for muzekker to be written, on the day it was decided by consensus 20/05/2015.
this decision, made on 20/05/2015, was duly and clearly explained on 21/05/2015 in the presence of the Public Prosecutor of the Supreme Court and in the absence of the defense Lawyer of the defendant Ibrahim Gunes, who made his defense at the trial.
No Comments