Tweet
BIA, Turkey
Dec 7 2007
Camera "Not Working" in Dink And Zirve Cases
In both the Hrant Dink murder case and the Malatya murder cases,
recorded evidence has "disappeared".
Býa news centre - Malatya
07 Aralýk 2007, Cuma
Erol ÖNDEROGLU
The Turkish public is discussing the disconcerting similarities
between the murders of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink and the
three Christian men at Zirve Publishing in Malatya, all murders
targetting different identities. It seems that the similarity does
not stop there; in both cases, evidence has disappeared.
Akbank recordings of relevant time gone
After Hrant Dink was murdered on 19 January, it only occured to the
prosecution to analyse recordings of the near-by Akbank branch after
Dink family lawyers called for such an analysis.
Hrant Dink's family identified murder suspect O.S. from security
cameras of shopkeepers in the area. However, although the Akbank's
cash machine camera had recordings from the previous day and until
the afternoon of the day of the murder, there were no recordings of
the murder, which took place at around 3 pm.
If it had been possible to analyse the recordings, it would have been
possible to find out more about some suspicious people who entered
and left a building site near the murder site before the murder.
When the police did not think of analysing the cameras, the joint
plaintiffs intervened. But when an investigation was started, the
building site had long been completed...
Ten-day recordings in hospital destroyed
In the Zirve murder case, there have been similar inconsistencies.
Emre Günaydin, the main suspect in the three murders, jumped from the
third floor of the Agbaba Apartment where the murders took place on
18 April. Seriously injured, he was taken to the Inönü University
Hospital, where two cameras were installed in his room to record 24
hours a day.
However, it has since emerged that the recordings have been "lost",
and that it is thus not possible to know who visited Günaydin during
his stay in hospital.
Officer organising recordings is himself implicated
Lawyers have analysed the case file and have found that the Malatya
prosecution ordered a change in cameras because they did not record
voices. So, ten days after the murder, security officers replaced the
old cameras with new, sound-recording ones, but in the process, "they
were not able, for technical reasons, to copy the ten-day recordings"
and destroyed them.
Malatya Police Chief Ali Osman Kahya had denied that the recordings
were destroyed, saying that they had been handed over to the court.
However, the Police Department for Smuggling and Organised Crime told
the prosecution that it with the existing technological possibilities
it had not possible to copy the recordings into media format, and
that the recordings had been destroyed.
Furthermore, it has emerged that lieutenant H.I., who was
commissioned by the prosecution to organise the recordings in
hospital, is suspicious himself.
A letter sent to the Presidency of the Union of Turkish Protestant
Churches on 25 May implicated several people in the murder, including
lieutenant H.I., who is said to have been one of the incitors of the
murders.
In the letter it said, ""the persons encouraging and directing Emre
Günaydin were our commander M. Ü. and a lecturer at the theology
faculty, R. Balat. (Polat). Balat was working with our commander M.Ü.
for around 4-5 months. The first person to contact Balat was H. I.,
the commander of the university police station. Later, contacts with
our regiment commander were made through sergeant M. C., with the
code name Seyhmus. Particularly before and after the event, these
meetings were frequent." (EÖ/AG)
http://www.bianet.org/bianet/kategori/english/10 3413/camera-not-working-in-dink-and-zirve-cases
Dec 7 2007
Camera "Not Working" in Dink And Zirve Cases
In both the Hrant Dink murder case and the Malatya murder cases,
recorded evidence has "disappeared".
Býa news centre - Malatya
07 Aralýk 2007, Cuma
Erol ÖNDEROGLU
The Turkish public is discussing the disconcerting similarities
between the murders of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink and the
three Christian men at Zirve Publishing in Malatya, all murders
targetting different identities. It seems that the similarity does
not stop there; in both cases, evidence has disappeared.
Akbank recordings of relevant time gone
After Hrant Dink was murdered on 19 January, it only occured to the
prosecution to analyse recordings of the near-by Akbank branch after
Dink family lawyers called for such an analysis.
Hrant Dink's family identified murder suspect O.S. from security
cameras of shopkeepers in the area. However, although the Akbank's
cash machine camera had recordings from the previous day and until
the afternoon of the day of the murder, there were no recordings of
the murder, which took place at around 3 pm.
If it had been possible to analyse the recordings, it would have been
possible to find out more about some suspicious people who entered
and left a building site near the murder site before the murder.
When the police did not think of analysing the cameras, the joint
plaintiffs intervened. But when an investigation was started, the
building site had long been completed...
Ten-day recordings in hospital destroyed
In the Zirve murder case, there have been similar inconsistencies.
Emre Günaydin, the main suspect in the three murders, jumped from the
third floor of the Agbaba Apartment where the murders took place on
18 April. Seriously injured, he was taken to the Inönü University
Hospital, where two cameras were installed in his room to record 24
hours a day.
However, it has since emerged that the recordings have been "lost",
and that it is thus not possible to know who visited Günaydin during
his stay in hospital.
Officer organising recordings is himself implicated
Lawyers have analysed the case file and have found that the Malatya
prosecution ordered a change in cameras because they did not record
voices. So, ten days after the murder, security officers replaced the
old cameras with new, sound-recording ones, but in the process, "they
were not able, for technical reasons, to copy the ten-day recordings"
and destroyed them.
Malatya Police Chief Ali Osman Kahya had denied that the recordings
were destroyed, saying that they had been handed over to the court.
However, the Police Department for Smuggling and Organised Crime told
the prosecution that it with the existing technological possibilities
it had not possible to copy the recordings into media format, and
that the recordings had been destroyed.
Furthermore, it has emerged that lieutenant H.I., who was
commissioned by the prosecution to organise the recordings in
hospital, is suspicious himself.
A letter sent to the Presidency of the Union of Turkish Protestant
Churches on 25 May implicated several people in the murder, including
lieutenant H.I., who is said to have been one of the incitors of the
murders.
In the letter it said, ""the persons encouraging and directing Emre
Günaydin were our commander M. Ü. and a lecturer at the theology
faculty, R. Balat. (Polat). Balat was working with our commander M.Ü.
for around 4-5 months. The first person to contact Balat was H. I.,
the commander of the university police station. Later, contacts with
our regiment commander were made through sergeant M. C., with the
code name Seyhmus. Particularly before and after the event, these
meetings were frequent." (EÖ/AG)
http://www.bianet.org/bianet/kategori/english/10 3413/camera-not-working-in-dink-and-zirve-cases