T.R.
SUPREME COURT
CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT
2016/2912
2017/3141
10.10.2017
CRIME OF HELPING TO KILL BY DESIGN (The Defendant Needs to Benefit from Unjust Provocation Provisions – Alleging that the Victim Has Acts That Consisted of Sexual Assault Against the Sister and Mother of the Defendant and These Acts Are Long-Terms/The Victim’s Behaviors/Unlawful Provocation)
WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM UNFORGETTABLE PROVISIONS (Assisting to Kill by Design/Any Excess Punishment for Defendant – Unjust Provocation Provisions)
EXTRA PUNISHMENT IS INSTALLED ABOUT THE DEFENDANT (The Allegedly That The Victim Has Acts That Constituted Sexual Assault Against His Sister and Mother And These Acts Are Long Term – The Defendant Should Have Taken Benefit From The Unjust Provocation Provisions/Aid To Kill By Design)
DEFINITION OF RIGHTS (The Annulment Decision of the Constitutional Court Should Be Observed in the Implementation of the Provisions of Deprivation of Rights Regarding the Defendant)
A CRIMINAL MISTAKE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE COURT (Acknowledgement that It Was Wrong to Senten the Defendant for Aiding to Intentionally Killing)
5237/m.31/3,39,40 62,81,82/1-a
SUMMARY : Considering the extent and continuity of the victim’s acts constituting sexual assault against the accused’s sister and mother, and the fact that this act covers a long period of time, in the trial against the accused for the crime of assisting murder by planning, considering the extent and continuity of the victim’s unjust provocation, less severity in written form than a reasonable punishment. It is a reason to overrule the appointment of an excess sentence by imposing a sentence of twenty-four years in prison, which can be applied in cases involving crimes. In addition, the Constitutional Court’s annulment decision should be observed in the implementation of the provisions of deprivation of rights against the accused. Moreover, he showed persistence and persistence in his decision, a reasonable time passed between the decision and the execution, and the conditions for the design were met; In accordance with the loyalty rule, it is understood that whether the action is caused by the person or characteristics of the perpetrator or the victim, it should be determined according to the perpetrator whether the action constitutes the crime of qualified willful murder and it is necessary to spread this situation to the partners. Instead of being punished for the crime of “helping to kill by design”, the decision to punish the child with the crime of “deliberately helping to kill” by making a mistake in the nature of a crime has also been considered as a reason for reversal.
CASE :
CASE :
The file was examined, should be discussed, he thought:
DECISION :
318 of CMUK No. 1412 in terms of the sentence established for the crime of murdering the victim by designing about the accused and subject to appeal in terms of the amount of punishment ex officio. In the appeal examination made with a hearing in accordance with the article;
The trial, the content of the file, the evidence collected and evaluated at the place of decision, the formation and the belief and discretion of the court as a result of the investigation, the acceptance and practice of the accused … and the juvenile driven to crime, in accordance with the formation of the murder crimes and partially their qualifications, the accused …, …, … and …, the evidence obtained in terms of murder crimes is not sufficient for the conviction of the defendants, the public cases brought against the defendants … and … are dropped due to the statute of limitations due to the changing crime characteristics, according to the justification that is legally and adequately explained, the juvenile delinquent to the crime … that the defendant’s attorney, who attended for no reason, was determined by the nature of the crime, the degree of provocation in the petition of the defendant’s defense, the fact that there was no planning in the trial, the act constituted the crime of willful murder, the TCK numbered 765 was more favorable, the defendants …, …, … and … the defense of the accused in favor of the acquitted defendants. who are directed that the attorney fee should be appreciated separately and with the rejection of the non-woven appeals,
A-) APPROVAL of the acquittal of defendants …, …, … and … of the crimes of “instigating murder by design”, of the provisions established in accordance with the procedure and law regarding the dismissal of public lawsuits due to the changing criminal characteristics of the defendants … and … and the statute of limitations,
B-) In the examination of the provisions established for the crimes of “premeditated killing” about the accused, about the child dragged into a crime … of aiding this crime;
According to the occurrence and the scope of the file; Despite the great age difference between the accused …’s sister… and the victim, there is a relationship that includes sexual intercourse and it has been going on for about 5-6 years back from the date of the incident, …’s marriage with … and the defendant …’s warnings, who learned about the situation. Despite this, the relationship continued, and the victim was not content with that, and had sexual intercourse with …’s mother, and in the face of all these events, the accused decided to kill the victim, 3 days before the event, he was going to shoot from the accused … at the wedding. He told his close friend … that he had supplied a gun with the pretext of killing the victim, and then was dragged into crime.
