When people give statements at the police station before going to court, in some cases what they say is not considered valid. These include situations such as drug use, torture, and threats. Even if it does not involve physical violence, a statement taken without a lawyer is only valid if it is confirmed in court. A ruling cannot be based on a statement given without a lawyer unless the person confirms the statement. You can review an example of a Supreme Court Decision.
Criminal Division
Case Number: 2014/24767
Decision Number: 2015/11737
“Text of Justice”
COURT: First Degree Criminal Court
CRIME: Theft, purchase or acceptance of goods obtained from the crime
JURISDICTION:
Acquittal
An appeal was filed against the decision of the local court, the file was examined, and the necessary issues were evaluated:
It was understood that the person harmed by the crime was not duly notified of the crime, that no notification was made stating that he could be tried in absentia if he did not appear despite being summoned, and that there was no letter stating that the notification had reached the aforementioned company, and in this case, it was understood that the person harmed by the crime had the right to participate; Pursuant to Article 237/2 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Court’s supplementary decision dated 17.01.2014 was overturned upon acceptance of …’s request for review;
CMK 148/4. In our case, one of the defendants … described a total of 10 different incidents in his statement to the law enforcement authorities without a defense attorney and, referring to this incident in the 6th line, attributed the crime to the other. While stating that they committed the crime together with the defendant, it is understood that the other defendants denied the charges at every stage and that the defendant did not confirm the statement of the law enforcement officers without defending himself before the judge or the court;
The court did not decide that the defendant’s confirmation of the law enforcement officers’ statements without presenting a defense was disrespectful and, finding it to be in accordance with procedure and law and based on discretion, unanimously decided on June 24, with the rejection of the defendant’s appeal, based on the file contents and trial minutes, the grounds on which the decision was based, and discretion.