"Narin Güran's brother Enes's appeal to the Court of Cassation."

23.06.2025 15:14

Enes Güran, who was arrested in connection with the murder of Narin Güran, whose lifeless body was found days after she went missing in Diyarbakır, has filed an appeal to the Court of Cassation. The application states that there are contradictory statements in the testimonies of Nevzat Bahtiyar.

Enes Güran, who was arrested in connection with the murder of Narin Güran (8), whose lifeless body was found in a stream bed 19 days after she was killed in the Bağlar district of Diyarbakır, has filed an appeal to the Court of Cassation through his lawyers.

Narin Güran, who went missing in the rural Tavşantepe neighborhood of Bağlar district on August 21, 2024, was found dead in a sack in the stream bed on the 19th day of the search efforts, covered with three stones weighing 30, 25, and 20 kilograms, and hidden among bushes. A case has been opened against four individuals at the Diyarbakır 8th High Criminal Court regarding her death. Uncle Salim Güran, who had DNA and hair samples belonging to Narin in his vehicle, along with her mother Yüksel Güran and brother Enes Güran, were detained, and neighbors Nevzat Bahtiyar, who confessed to transporting the body to the stream bed, are facing a request for aggravated life imprisonment for the crime of 'intentional murder of a child in complicity.'

AGGRAVATED LIFE IMPRISONMENT FOR MOTHER, BROTHER, AND UNCLE

In the second hearing of the case, which started on December 26 and ended on December 28, Salim Güran, Enes Güran, and Yüksel Güran were sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment for 'intentional murder of a child in complicity,' while Nevzat Bahtiyar received a 4-year and 6-month prison sentence for 'destroying, concealing, or altering evidence.' The court ruled for the continuation of the defendants' detention.

APPEALS REVIEWED; COURT'S SENTENCE UPHELD

The appeals filed by the lawyers of the detained defendants, the lawyers of the complainant, father Arif Güran, and the Family and Social Services Ministry and Diyarbakır Bar Association as 'participants' were reviewed at the Diyarbakır 8th High Criminal Court. The case file, consisting of 17 folders, along with the appeals, was sent to the 1st Criminal Chamber of the Diyarbakır Regional Court of Justice for evaluation. The 1st Criminal Chamber of the Regional Court of Justice, which examined the file and the appeals, upheld the prison sentences given to the four defendants by a majority vote in its decision on May 26.

ENES GÜRAN'S APPEAL

Following this decision, Enes Güran filed an appeal to the Court of Cassation with a 102-page petition prepared through his lawyers Mahir Akbilek and Muhammet Fatih Demir. The petition stated that there were contradictory statements in the testimonies of Nevzat Bahtiyar, noting, "A total of 269 statements were taken during the investigation, and it was understood that the only person who made statements regarding the intentional murder act on the day of the incident was Nevzat Bahtiyar. Bahtiyar's statements were taken as a suspect on September 4, 2024, at the Diyarbakır Provincial Gendarmerie Command, as a suspect again during the location demonstration on the same day, and as a suspect during interrogations at the Diyarbakır Chief Public Prosecutor's Office and the Diyarbakır 5th Peace Criminal Court on September 10, 2024, and again as a suspect at the Diyarbakır Chief Public Prosecutor's Office on September 21, 2024, and as a defendant at the Diyarbakır 8th High Criminal Court on November 7, 2024, and December 26, 2024. Except for Bahtiyar's first statement, in his remaining seven statements, he claimed that he only received the body from the other defendant Salim Güran and buried it, denying that he killed Narin. He provided contradictory statements regarding the meeting he claimed to have had with Salim Güran on the day of the incident, the reason for accepting the offer, the location from which the body was taken, the manner of taking the body, and the process of loading it into the car, and later added some explanations regarding the motive for the murder. In this case, none of the suspects/defendants, including our client, accepted the charge of intentional murder and claimed their innocence. However, while Nevzat Bahtiyar pointed to Salim Güran as the perpetrator of the incident, the other defendants stated that Nevzat Bahtiyar was guilty," it was stated.

"RESULTS REACHED BASED ON THE MINUTES ARE ILLEGAL"

In the petition stating the reasons for Enes Güran's arrest, it was expressed that the gendarmerie minutes were signed by the gendarmerie personnel without witnessing the content of the minutes. "It has been understood that the 'women's fight' and 'How can I help Enes?' minutes, which were evaluated as evidence in both the first instance court and the Appeals Special Criminal Chamber decision, were not brought to the court despite our persistent requests. Indeed, it is clearly understood from the statements of the witnesses heard during the trial related to the 'Harboring a Criminal' charge, which is connected to this trial, that there are no other law enforcement witnesses for these two minutes, except for this gendarmerie personnel named H. Non-commissioned Officer, and the personnel who signed the minutes admitted that they signed the minutes without witnessing them because they trusted their colleagues. In light of the fact that minutes consisting solely of witness statements are prohibited documents to be read in court according to Article 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the results reached based on these minutes are illegal," it was stated.

"THE SENTENCE HARMS NARIN'S SACRED MEMORY"

In the petition, which stated that the reasons for Enes Güran's arrest included the narrowed base study report, the testimony of Nevzat Bahtiyar, and the minutes dated September 2, 2024, related to mother Yüksel, the following statements were included: "The actions that prove Enes Güran's participation in the crime are not described in the decision and the appeal ruling, and the quoted decision of the general assembly of the penal law summarizes this title. Because reaching a conclusion based on assumptions not even put forward by the defendant, instead of establishing a judgment with legally obtained, rational, scientific, and credible evidence, is contrary to the purpose of criminal procedure. In the reasoning of the local court, three pieces of evidence were placed at the center regarding Enes. These are the narrowed base, the testimony of Nevzat Bahtiyar, and the minutes dated September 2, 2024, related to mother Yüksel. Furthermore, it has been established through multiple witnesses and definitive camera recordings that our client, who frequently expressed his love for his sister and knew she was missing in the village, had no motivation, reason, or justification to kill his sister or to be an observer to her murder. Even the emphasis on the feudal family, which we consider forced, attributed in the dissenting opinion, does not align with the regional realities, as will be seen from the image recordings, he continued his daily routine, and his statements are consistent with the corroborating evidence. In light of these facts, we believe that the local court had no actions that would lead to a conviction, and the treatment he was subjected to and the sentence he received only harm Narin's sacred memory.