Date: 31 August 2025.
16-year-old Hiranur Nilgün Aygar was brought to Mersin City Hospital, dead. Hiranur was shot in the head with an unlicensed gun and killed. The local court sentenced her lover Hüseyin Arda Şark to life imprisonment for "killing a child with possible intent". The other defendants were accused of "destroying and concealing criminal evidence". All three male defendants said, "He was shot while joking and died." So what was the truth?
In the hundreds of pages of case file, the following statement of mother Gülten Tan attracts my attention: "I do not think that the incident happened by accident. A fight broke out in which the defendants were involved, and they ran away. I think he could not get rid of his anger and took it out on my daughter. I also heard that the defendant Hüseyin forced my daughter to sell drugs."
Indeed, I come across a lot of data in the file regarding the mother's suspicion. For example, in the reasoned decision, it is written that "The expert detected correspondence with many people on Hüseyin's phone that could be the subject of drug trafficking."
WHAT HAPPENED IN 73 MINUTES?
Then, I read the statements of Derya Demir, one of the lawyers who took on the case on behalf of the Children and Women First Association and defended on behalf of the mother Gülten Tan: "The communication traffic displayed by the defendants during the 73-minute period completely refutes the 'shock' defense. It is not possible for a person in shock to make rational decisions, manage the drug trade or develop a strategy with his accomplices. However, in the telephone examination of the defendant Hüseyin Arda Şark, the time when the victim was dying in the stream bed was between 23:00 and 23:00." It is known that between 23:20 he checked whether the drug money had been transferred to the account, and that he exchanged extremely technical and cold-blooded correspondence such as "Cousin, there was 400, I threw it away", "Check the account, it should have arrived".
It should be considered that during this period, there was not only drug traffic, but also intense meeting traffic between the defendants and people outside who were likely to be participants. The interviews with Azize Say and İbrahim Demir should make us think that the incident would not be limited to just the three people in the vehicle, but also whether contact was made with an outside 'mentor' or 'guider'. In particular, the meeting between the defendant Hüseyin and a person named İbrahim Demir after the murder and the fact that this person participated in the police search with the key of the defendant Hüseyin's house the day after the murder, raise strong doubts about how deep this participation network could be. It should be investigated whether İbrahim Demir concealed evidence. The fact that the defendants waited for more than an hour in other negotiations instead of surrendering immediately after the incident proves that this period was not a 'preparation for surrender' but a process of 'clearing evidence and constructing a joint statement'. "The defendants acted with a collective mind to ensure the death of the victim and to save themselves with the least damage."
DECISION ON OCTOBER 19
Yes, the lawyer says so, but unfortunately it has not been taken into consideration... Because, when I look at the case file, I see that the subject of the case was not expanded in order to properly investigate the organized relations of the defendants with drugs during the investigation and prosecution process. So much so that the court broke the connection between drugs and murder and filed a criminal complaint after the verdict. Likewise, WhatsApp correspondence, including HTS records, was not collected during the investigation phase. However, it was put into the file months after the incident upon the request of the court. I could go on and on, but I think it's clear.
At this point... The court of appeal convened two days ago with a hearing and the prosecutor requested that the defendant Hüseyin Arda Şark be sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment due to direct intent. The final decision is expected to be made on October 19.
The decision of the appeal will not only seek justice for 16-year-old Hiranur; They will also vote on the drug networks hiding behind the lies of "He was shot while joking", the gang mechanisms that advise the perpetrators, and the armor of impunity that makes the lives of young girls miserable. The judiciary will either completely lift the curtain on this cold-blooded organization or close another murder by classifying it as an "accident". We are followers.
