27.05.2026 15:00
The statements entered into the file in the Dorukhan Büyükışık investigation have revealed striking contradictions. While some witnesses said they did not see a cigarette pack, cigarette butts, keys, or napkins at the scene, police statements noted that these objects were present but were not taken into custody because it was not deemed necessary.
Dorukhan Büyükışık, son of retired Major General Ethem Büyükışık, was found dead at a construction site in İzmir's Narlıdere district on May 13, 2018. Initially assessed as a 'suicide,' the investigation into the incident has been reopened and is now proceeding under suspicion of murder.
All 23 suspects detained in simultaneous operations across 9 provinces centered in İzmir have been arrested. Arrest warrants were re-issued for security guards Tayfun Çakmakçı (41), Hüseyin Kaya (69), Hulusu Aras (77), worker Bilal Çelik (47), and Ali Gülbaşı (77), who reportedly worked as a guard in the nearby area, who are being tried for intentional homicide. Construction supervisor Yiğit Aykurt (34), identified as the company's field engineer at the time of the incident, was also apprehended and arrested.
A total of 24 suspects have been arrested within the scope of the case, including Tanyer Construction Company partners Mehmet Münir Tanyer and his son Mehmet Taylan Tanyer, former Narlıdere Police Chief İsmail Yalçın, former Narlıdere Station Commander İsmail Köksal, Crime Scene Investigation Bureau Chief Atakan Kaçar, and Group Supervisor Commissioner Hüseyin Vurucu.
CONFLICTING STATEMENTS REGARDING EVIDENCE AT THE SCENE
Statements in the investigation file reveal striking discrepancies regarding objects at the crime scene.
In his statement, Musa Erikçi said, 'I did not see the black pipe or the shoe print on it; I did not see a cigarette pack or cigarette butts near or around the victim. However, there were old, smoked cigarette butts in the area.'
Mehmet Taylan Tanyer, son of company owner Mehmet Münir Tanyer, stated, 'I did not see any blood stains, human tissue, or any other body parts around him. At that moment, I took a photo of the victim with my cell phone. When I arrived at the scene, there were no police or ambulance. I did not see any objects like keys, a cigarette pack, or tissues around the victim, nor did they catch my attention.'
Company owner Mehmet Münir Tanyer also said in his statement, 'When I saw the victim, I did not see any other objects such as keys, a cigarette pack, or tissues near him.'
“NOT PRESERVED”
Crime scene investigation police officer D.Ö.Ö., in his statement in the file, said, 'No action was taken regarding the shoe print on the black pipe, the two cigarette butts found at the scene, and the one cigarette pack. They were not taken into custody either.'
Özkan also stated that they were the last team to arrive at the scene, noting that the scene had been disturbed by earlier teams, making it impossible to examine the shoe print.
The police officer said, 'The shoe print on the black pipe did not have the necessary characteristics for examination. Therefore, no examination was conducted on the print. As for the cigarette butts and the cigarette pack, there were many cigarette butts at the scene, and because they appeared old due to dirt, dust, and construction debris, no examination was conducted, and they were not taken into custody.'
“THERE WERE KEYS, HEADPHONES, AND TISSUES”
The statement of police officer D.A. contains details different from other accounts in the file.
The police officer said, 'I recall there were headphones, car keys, and tissues near the victim's body at the crime scene.'
The same statement noted that the cigarette butts and cigarette pack found at the scene were photographed but were not assessed as evidence.
Statements in the investigation file reveal notable differences regarding the evidence at the crime scene, including the shoe print, cigarette butts, and the teams that first arrived at the scene. The conflicting statements in the file have sparked renewed public debate.