04.12.2025 12:33
In Kayseri, the sentence of İsmail K. (46), who was sentenced to life imprisonment for the aggravated murder of Hasibe Soykuk (51) with a hammer in order to steal her bracelets, was upheld by the Kayseri Regional Court of Appeal as being in accordance with the law.
The incident occurred on November 13, 2023, around 21:00 in a two-story house on Yüksel Çavuşoğlu Street in the Gesi Güney neighborhood of the Melikgazi district. Seyit Ahmet Soykuk found his wife, Hasibe Soykuk, lying on the floor in a pool of blood when he returned home after grazing his animals. Upon notification, gendarmerie and medical teams arrived at the house. It was determined that Hasibe Soykuk had been killed by being struck on the head with a hard object. The Provincial Gendarmerie Command teams and the Gendarmerie Crime Investigation Team (JASAT) detained the woman's husband, Seyit Ahmet Soykuk, and their neighbor, İsmail K., as suspects. While Soykuk was released after his statement, İsmail K. claimed that the woman's son, B.B.S., committed the murder, stating, "B.B.S. had a hammer in his hand, we pushed each other. B.B.S. told me, 'Don't tell anyone, I will kill your family and your children.' I went home in fear. I washed away the blood stains," he testified. Following this statement, the woman's sons, S.S. and B.B.S., were also detained. However, after it was determined that the woman's children were elsewhere on the day of the incident, S.S. and B.B.S. were released.
MURDER CONFESSED IN PRISON
JASAT teams, examining 115 hours of security camera footage, also detected blood traces at the location of K.'s house. The investigation revealed blood traces inside the house as well. In his initial statement, K. claimed, "I took the materials in question to an empty area and threw them away," and footage emerged showing K. carrying materials in a bag. During the gendarmerie's search, a hammer, bloody clothes, and shoes were found in the area. İsmail Kocatürk, who has nine records for 'Theft' and 'Fraud' and initially claimed he did not commit the murder, wrote a petition in prison confessing to killing Hasibe Soykuk. The Kayseri Chief Public Prosecutor's Office prepared an indictment. In the indictment, aggravated life imprisonment was requested for the defendant Kocatürk for the crime of 'deliberately killing a woman to conceal a crime, destroy evidence, facilitate its commission, or avoid capture.'
DECISION HEARING HELD
In the decision hearing held on March 13 last year at the Kayseri 1st Heavy Penal Court, the detained defendant İsmail K., who participated via the Audio and Visual Information System (SEGBİS) from prison, stated that he did not accept the accusations regarding the bracelets, saying, "They are definitely lying. If I were to take the gold, I would take all of them. I would not just leave one. I do not accept the 'Robbery' charge attributed to me. I admit that I committed the murder. I am very sorry for that. When they insulted me and my wife and tried to hit me with a sieve, I hit back to protect myself. My intention was not to kill."
NO REDUCTION IN SENTENCE
The court sentenced the defendant İsmail K. to aggravated life imprisonment for 'deliberately killing a woman to conceal a crime, destroy evidence, facilitate its commission, or avoid capture.' The presiding judge stated that no 'good behavior' reduction was applied as the defendant's past criminal record and his attitude and behavior during the hearing showed no remorse. The panel also decided to impose a 10.5-year prison sentence for the crime of 'Robbery with a weapon.'
CASE APPEALED
The defendant İsmail K.'s lawyer appealed the decision, transferring the case to the Kayseri Regional Court of Justice. After reviewing the case, the 1st Criminal Chamber concluded the case. The 1st Criminal Chamber stated that there was no legal violation regarding the procedure and substance in the local court's decision, that there were no deficiencies in evidence and procedures, and that the evaluation in terms of proof was appropriate, thus rejecting the appeals on the merits. It was also noted that the decision taken by unanimous vote was open to appeal to the Court of Cassation.