Tweet
GREEN LIGHT FOR RETRIAL OF DINK MURDER
Hurriyet
March 30 2012
Turkey
A prosecutor has appealed the ruling in the Hrant Dink murder trial,
arguing that the crime was an organized hit.
"The suspects acted as a cell in Trabzon with the same aims as the
Ergenekon crime gang," the prosecutor said in his 30-page appeal
against the January court ruling, adding that the suspects should be
punished for committing an organized act of crime.
Dink was the chief editor for weekly Agos, a newspaper published in
Turkish and Armenian. He was shot dead in front of his office on Jan.
19, 2007, in Istanbul. Triggerman Ogun Samast was sentenced to 22
years in prison for the murder last year. Instigator Yasin Hayal was
sentenced on Jan. 17 to aggravated life imprisonment, while former
police informant and suspect Erhan Tuncel was released, prompting
widespread anger.
In its ruling, the court argued that there was not enough evidence
indicating the existence of an organization behind the crime despite
lingering doubts.
"If the court accepts the existence of an organization behind the
crime but lacks the evidence, it should have asked the prosecutor's
office for further investigation into the issue," the prosecutor said
in his appeal.
Hurriyet
March 30 2012
Turkey
A prosecutor has appealed the ruling in the Hrant Dink murder trial,
arguing that the crime was an organized hit.
"The suspects acted as a cell in Trabzon with the same aims as the
Ergenekon crime gang," the prosecutor said in his 30-page appeal
against the January court ruling, adding that the suspects should be
punished for committing an organized act of crime.
Dink was the chief editor for weekly Agos, a newspaper published in
Turkish and Armenian. He was shot dead in front of his office on Jan.
19, 2007, in Istanbul. Triggerman Ogun Samast was sentenced to 22
years in prison for the murder last year. Instigator Yasin Hayal was
sentenced on Jan. 17 to aggravated life imprisonment, while former
police informant and suspect Erhan Tuncel was released, prompting
widespread anger.
In its ruling, the court argued that there was not enough evidence
indicating the existence of an organization behind the crime despite
lingering doubts.
"If the court accepts the existence of an organization behind the
crime but lacks the evidence, it should have asked the prosecutor's
office for further investigation into the issue," the prosecutor said
in his appeal.