TC
high
18. CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT
BASIC NO.: 2015/4471
DECISION NO:2015/6667
THE DECISION IS HISTORIC. 06/10/2015
The decision made by the Local Court has been appealed, but the duration of the application and the nature of the decision, as well as the status of the file according to the date of the crime, have been discussed:
Since there was no reason for Jul’s request to be rejected, the bottom line was got to the bottom of it.
In the examination conducted on the basis of the minutes, documents and the content of the justification reflecting the judicial process in which the conscientious conviction was formed, it was found that other justifications were not in place.
But;
The legal value protected by the punishment of insulting acts is the honor, dignity and dignity of persons, and in order for this crime to occur, the behavior must have the purpose of humiliating the person. In some cases, whether a move is refereed or not is relative and may vary depending on time, location and situation. Severe criticism or offensive words directed at people should not be considered within the scope of insult crime, these words should clearly constitute a concrete verb or phenomenon or insulting verb that may offend honor, honor and dignity.
On the day of the incident, the defendant addressed the complaining police officers and said, “What is it again, why are you blocking my way? Is it humanity that you do? Is there such rudeness? What is it, why are you blocking me now? Go look at the Kurds, deal with the Frequently Asked Bar Association, fuck the mother of the police…….. they swear that you have done nothing to us, you are not comfortable with us, what do you want from me, get off my head”” saying, these are rude words, not insulting the honor, honor and dignity of the complainants, and the elements of the insult crime have not been formed, despite the conviction decision being made on illegal and inappropriate grounds,
Contrary to the law, the defendant F..K..Is..when the reasons for the appeal were evaluated on the spot, it was unanimously decided on 06/10/2015 to OVERTURN the DECISION by rejecting the idea of approval contained in the communique, to continue the file from the pre-trial stage and send it to the court of merits / judgment for conclusion.