Opinion announced in the hidden camera case in the bungalow in Sapanca

At the hearing at Sapanca 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance, the defendant H.K. and his lawyer participated via Audio and Video Information System (SEGBİS). Defendant T.S. and the complainants and their lawyers did not attend the hearing.

The defendant H.K., who was given the floor regarding the case filed and merged with the file because the complainants' daughter M.K. was also a victim, said: "I repeat my previous statements. I do not accept the accusations made against me. It has been determined that the camera is broken, therefore I request my acquittal." he said.

H.K.'s lawyer claimed that his client did not commit the crime and that the cameras were not working and requested acquittal.

Announcing his opinion on the merits, the public prosecutor stated that it was established that the crimes charged against the defendants were committed against the participants and the victim, and requested that the defendants be sentenced to imprisonment from 1 year and 6 months to 4 years and 6 months each for the crime of "violating the right to privacy" three times.

The judge postponed the hearing, giving the parties additional time to defend against the opinion.

WHAT HAPPENED?

Sakarya Governorship took action upon allegations of hidden camera surveillance in the bungalow in the district on April 15, 2025, becoming public.

A judicial and administrative investigation was initiated in the business in question regarding the incident, and as a result of the studies, the owner of the business, H.K. (31) and suspect T.S. (48) was detained by police teams.

The suspects, who were sent to the courthouse after the procedures at the police station, were arrested by the on-duty judgeship, and the business was sealed indefinitely by the district municipality.

In the indictment prepared by the Sapanca Chief Public Prosecutor's Office and accepted by the Sapanca 2nd Criminal Court of First Instance, H.K. and T.S. A prison sentence of 1 year and 6 months to 4 years and 6 months is requested for him for "violating the right to privacy".

At the hearing of the case held in September 2025, it was decided to release the defendants.