In the reasoned decision of the Ankara 34th High Criminal Court, it was reminded that an investigation was launched after Sema Esen was found dead in her residence in Ankara's Keçiören district on June 3, 2020.
It was stated that Ümitcan Uygun, whose statement was included in the reasoned decision, said that he was the boyfriend of the victim, that they met in the evening the day before the incident, that he dropped Esen home and went to his friend M.C.Ç.
In Uygun's statement, it was stated that Sema Esen sent him a message to come home because she did not want him to be friends with M.C.Ç. He stated that there were farewell statements in his last messages, but he did not take it seriously because he was drunk and did not believe that he would do anything to her.
It was recorded that Uygun said that he read the messages again when he woke up in the morning, and when he called Esen and did not receive an answer, he directed his friend B.G. to go to Esen's house.
It was stated that Uygun, who stated that his friends opened the door with a locksmith and reported that Esen was lying at home, said that he immediately went to the scene, saw the 112 teams and the police arriving, and that he voluntarily handed over his phone so that the messages Esen sent could be examined.
In the reasoned decision, it was noted that, according to the crime scene findings, the two ends of Sema Esen's robe belt were trapped behind the door and when the door was opened, Sema Esen fell to the ground, but a systematic autopsy was required to determine the truth about her death.
In the reasoned decision, which included the forensic medical report, it was stated that it was determined that it was possible for the person to have committed the act that caused his death, considering the environment in which the body was found, the findings of the crime scene investigation and the findings detected in the autopsy.
In the reasoned decision, which included witness statements, camera recordings and expert reports, it was stated that since there was no evidence that Sema Esen was killed as a result of murder on the date of the incident, a public case was filed against the defendant for the crime of "inciting suicide, strengthening the decision to commit suicide".
The victim made Esen want to commit suicide
In the reasoned decision, it was noted that in the correspondence between the victim and the defendant on the night of the incident, it was clear that the defendant, after forming the idea of suicide in the victim Esen, strengthened this desire and caused him to end his life, and the following findings were included:
"During the continuation of the conversation, despite Esen's messages that he would end his life, he remained silent and achieved his goal of suicide, and as a result, when the subject of death was brought up by the defendant, Esen started to think about death. Especially when the correspondences, screenshots and witness statements between the parties on the night of the incident were evaluated together, the defendant's action was found to be confirmed, and Sema Esen created a feeling and desire for suicide even though it was never present in her mind. Then, as determined in the expert report, she asked her lover for a post in her WhatsApp status message. "It was understood that he reiterated his desire to be saved and thus encouraged Esen to commit suicide and made him take the decision to commit suicide, causing him to strengthen the idea of taking this decision into action, and as a result of his action, suicide occurred, and it was decided that the defendant should be sentenced to 4 years in prison for the crime of 'encouraging suicide, strengthening the decision to commit suicide'."
Acquitted of the crime of "tormenting"
In the reasoned decision, it was also stated that the elements sought for the crime of "torture" were not met and that the random repetition of independent crimes that were determined or alleged to have occurred between the parties due to fights that occurred for other reasons was not sufficient to constitute the crime of torment, and it was decided to acquit the defendant Uygun of the crime of "torturing".
