Decision of non-prosecution for 15 suspects in Aynur Kanbur murder
In the investigation into the murder of Mezdeke dancer Aynur Kanbur, which was solved after 10 years, a decision of non-prosecution was given because there was not enough evidence against 15 people, including her daughter Dilara Güngör.
Quick Look
In the investigation into the murder of former Mezdeke dancer Aynur Kanbur in 2016, which was resolved 10 years later, insufficient evidence was found for 15 suspects, including her daughter Dilara Güngör, to show their connection to the murder.
AI-generated summary
Why It Matters
Aynur Kanbur, former dancer of Mezdeke Group, was killed in an armed attack at her home on March 24, 2016.
In the investigation into the murder of Mezdeke Group's former dancer Aynur Kanbur in Şişli 10 years ago, it was revealed that 15 people, including her daughter Dilara Güngör, were investigated as suspects, but there was not enough evidence to show their connection with the murder.
HE WAS KILLED WITH 6 BULLETS IN HIS HOME
Aynur Kanbur, a former dancer of the Mezdeke Group, was attacked with an gun at her home in Şişli Fulya on March 24, 2016. According to the special report of Habertürk reporter Mustafa Şekeroğlu; An investigation was launched by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the murder of Kanbur, who died at the scene with 6 bullets hitting his body.
Initial investigations following the incident revealed that a person ran from the building after the gunshots. By examining the security cameras, it was determined that the suspect came to the scene on foot after getting off the metrobus in Mecidiyeköy, and after the murder, he quickly walked away towards Beşiktaş Square.
MURDER SOLVED AFTER 10 YEARS
The murder case, the perpetrator of which could not be identified for many years, was solved after 10 years with the new work of the Istanbul Police Department Public Order Branch Directorate Homicide Bureau teams. Bülent Gündüz, who was determined to be the perpetrator of the murder, was caught and arrested.
While Gündüz confessed to killing Aynur Kanbur, he claimed that he committed the murder alone.
However, in the indictment prepared after the investigation, the prosecutor's office did not find Gündüz's statement that he committed the murder alone sufficient. A lawsuit was filed against Yüksel Kar, Serdar Kar and Fazlı Kar on the grounds that they were the instigators of the murder.
The trial against Bülent Gündüz and three others started at the Istanbul 9th High Criminal Court. In the decision of non-prosecution, it was stated that a public lawsuit was filed against four people for intentional murder and that the trial was continuing on the file numbered 2026/237.
NEW DEVELOPMENT AFTER THE INDICTMENT
After the preparation of the indictment regarding the murder of Aynur Kanbur, there was a new development in the file.
An investigation file was reserved for people who were suspected and investigated for years when the murder was still unsolved. With the decision made by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office stating that there was no need for prosecution, it was revealed which names were investigated as suspects before the murder was solved.
Among these names, the most notable ones were Aynur Kanbur's daughter Dilara Güngör and Hüseyin Rıza I.
WHY WAS HIS DAUGHTER DİLARA SUSPECTED?
The prosecutor's decision also included details of why Dilara Güngör was included among the suspects. According to the decision, Aynur Kanbur explained that she had a lot of problems with her daughter Dilara Güngör in a meeting with her friend Dilek E. about 1-1.5 months before her murder.
Following this information, Dilara Güngör began to be investigated as a suspect in the murder investigation.
During the police work, it was determined that Dilara Güngör talked to Mehmet Ali D. by phone approximately 1-1.5 months before the murder and met face to face in Esenyurt on February 16, 2016. Thereupon, Mehmet Ali D. was also included in the investigation.
3 MORE PEOPLE WITH DİLARA'S MEETING WERE REACHED
The investigation was expanded this time through Mehmet Ali D.'s telephone connections. It was determined that Mehmet Ali D. frequently contacted Zeyni Ö., Serdar Y. and Erkan S. by phone.
These three names were also included in the investigation as suspects. In addition, Akilas M., Aleksandros P., Deniz T., Eyüp Bilal G. and Orhan T. were also included in the scope of the investigation as they were considered to be suspects.
PHONE CALLS ARE ALSO UNDER THE CLOSURE
Homicide Bureau teams did not only focus on Dilara Güngör's connections. The phone calls Aynur Kanbur made before she was killed were also examined. It was determined that Aynur Kanbur was in frequent contact with Hüseyin Rıza I. before the incident and on the day of the murder.
Thereupon, Hüseyin Rıza I. and his frequent contacts Yelda Ö., Fethiye Dilek I., Adnan Emre I., and Adil A. were also investigated.
THE DEBATE BEFORE THE MURDER WAS ALSO INVESTIGATED
During the street investigations carried out by the police, information was obtained that Aynur Kanbur had an argument with a woman in a white car approximately 15-20 days before the murder.
It was evaluated that the vehicle in question might belong to Fethiye Dilek I., wife of Hüseyin Rıza I. This information was also investigated within the scope of the investigation.
DECISION TO HEAR FOR 15 SUSPECTS
Within the scope of the investigation, measures were taken to detect, listen to and record the communication of 15 people with the decisions taken by different courts in 2016 and 2017.
Among these names was Aynur Kanbur's daughter, Dilara Güngör. According to the decision of the prosecutor's office, measures were taken to detect, listen to and record the communications of a total of 15 people.
THEY WERE INTERESTED BUT THERE WAS NO CONNECTION WITH THE MURDER
As a result of the technical follow-up and investigations, no evidence was found to show that all these people, especially Dilara Güngör, participated in or were involved in the murder of Aynur Kanbur.
The prosecutor's office determined that there was not enough evidence and indications to show that the suspects, against whom communication measures were applied, committed the murder and to file a lawsuit against them.
After the mysterious murder was solved 10 years later, it was decided that there was no need to prosecute the people in question.
Open Questions
- What defense will the instigators use at trial?





