19.06.2026 17:31
A woman who introduced herself as a deputy prosecutor and intern prosecutor at the Ankara Courthouse was found to be acting with a fake identity thanks to the attention of police officers. The suspect, who tried to give orders to the police and was found carrying a judge-prosecutor candidate ID card belonging to another person, was arrested.
A woman named M.A. in Ankara visited a police station multiple times in the last few days to speak with the personnel on duty.
SHE TRIED TO GIVE ORDERS TO THE POLICE
During the meetings, the woman, who introduced herself sometimes as a 'deputy prosecutor' at the Ankara Courthouse and sometimes as a 'trainee prosecutor,' attempted to give orders to the personnel. M.A. also applied to the police station to file complaints about the police officers on duty and requested their identity and duty information.
LAW SCHOOL DROPOUT REVEALED
When the suspicious police officers asked the woman to present her ID, she claimed she was working as a 'trainee prosecutor.' After the situation was reported to the prosecutor's office, investigations revealed that the suspect, M.A., was neither a deputy prosecutor nor a trainee prosecutor candidate. Further inquiries determined that the suspect had dropped out of the first year of law school. During a search of the suspect, an identification card for a judge-prosecutor candidate, issued in the name of a person she claimed was her boyfriend, was seized.
"I DID NOT USE THE ID FOR THEFT"
In her statement at the Ankara 4th Criminal Court of Peace, M.A. denied the charges, stating that she did not use the ID for theft purposes, saying, "I did not use the ID for such a purpose. I did not give his ID because I was not in contact with my ex-boyfriend. I request to be released pending trial." The suspect's defense attorneys argued that their client did not obtain any material or immaterial benefit, had a fixed residence, and there was no suspicion of flight, requesting the imposition of judicial control measures.
COURT ORDERED DETENTION
The duty court, evaluating the statements of the complainant, witnesses, and suspect, along with the evidence in the file, stated that there was strong suspicion that the suspect committed the crime of 'theft from a place accessible to everyone, by leaving unlocked.' The court decided that judicial control measures would be insufficient and ordered the suspect's detention.