The disgusting proposal of the guard who sexually abused a mentally disabled child has come to light.

Details have emerged regarding the other defendant guard and witnesses in the case of the guard who was arrested two years ago for allegedly raping a mentally disabled girl in the Ceyhan district of Adana. It was claimed that the defendant guard Mehmet Can D. attempted to bribe the family with 500,000 lira to withdraw their complaint after trying to sell the girl for money following the abuse.

"IF I AM NOT ACQUITTED IN THIS CASE, I WILL KILL HIM, HE WILL LIE IN A COLD GRAVE"

Details have emerged in the court where the defendant guard Mehmet Can D. is being tried for allegedly raping the 25% mentally disabled girl C. İ. two years ago and forcing her into sexual relations with others for money. In his statement, the defendant Mehmet Can D. claimed that he did not have any sexual relations with C. İ., while the defendant Fatih Ş. stated that he was threatened by Mehmet Can, who said he had a relationship with C. İ. Fatih Ş. said, "Many people sent me messages. He was sending messages like, 'If I am not acquitted in this case, I will kill him, he will lie in a cold grave.'" The guards who were heard as witnesses stated that they had heard about the relationship between the defendant Mehmet Can D. and the victim C. İ. C. İ.'s mother H. G. stated that the defendant Mehmet Can D. had a relationship with her daughter when she was 13-14 years old, saying, "Mehmet Can D. sent messages through the landlord to make us withdraw our complaint." It was also claimed that the defendant offered the family 500,000 lira if they withdrew their complaint. In a recent hearing at the Ceyhan 1st Heavy Penal Court, the defenses of the defendants Mehmet Can D., Mehmet Ali T., and Fatih Ş., along with the statements of the guards who were heard as witnesses, revealed in detail how the incidents of "rape, sexual abuse, and pimping" against the mentally disabled C. İ. occurred over the years.

The defendant guards denied the accusations in their defenses. The arrested guard Mehmet Can D. stated in his defense that he was falsely accused, saying, "The victim initially did not make any statements against me; she accused another guard. After her third statement, she turned the accusations towards me. I absolutely did not engage in any sexual acts or behaviors towards this person, I did not have sexual relations with her, I did not give her drugs, and I did not facilitate prostitution. I reject all the accusations against me. My only involvement in the incident was reporting the messages the victim showed us regarding our guard colleague to my superiors; I have no other connection or relation."

"WE DID NOT MEET OUTSIDE FOR SEXUAL RELATIONS"

The defendant Mehmet Can D. stated that he knew C. İ.'s phone number and that it was saved on his phone, defending himself as follows: "Once, while I was on duty at the district governor's office, she told me that she was being harassed. She shared her troubles with me, and at that time, she gave me her number. I met with her to listen to her problems. The claim that I met with her for 480 hours is absolutely not true. When I gathered the content of 71 meetings, I realized that I spoke with her for a total of seven and a half hours. As far as I remember, I started meeting with the victim in April 2022, and I only spoke with her over the phone. We did not meet outside for sexual relations or kissing or anything like that. The defendant Mehmet Can D. named the guards with whom they had common meetings, saying, "I do not know the reason why we had common base signals on different dates. I definitely did not meet her in the same place; perhaps I might have encountered her in nearby places while I was on duty. Because the victim generally wandered around the district governor's office. This person is underage and constantly roams the streets. No one was looking out for her. I had these meetings to help her solve her problems."

"I DO NOT ACCEPT THE ACCUSATIONS"

The court president reminded the defendant Mehmet Can D. of the statements made by guard Mehmet K. regarding the allegations that he offered 500,000 lira to C. İ.'s family to withdraw their complaint, saying, "Mehmet Can came to the building where I work. He asked if I could be an intermediary for withdrawing the complaint." He asked if this was related to the mentioned amount of 500,000 TL. The defendant Mehmet Can D. replied, "I absolutely did not ask Mehmet K. to be an intermediary. After C. İ. made these complaints, Mehmet K. asked me about the 500,000 TL. I told him that I was not that person, and I even told him, 'Brother, tell him to stay away from me. He is making false accusations against me.' The meeting I had with Mehmet K. was in May 2023. C. İ. is a person known by the police. Citizens around constantly report about C. İ.; even if we take action, the situation does not get resolved. Therefore, I did not take action."

The defendant guard Mehmet Ali T. also stated that the accusation was a false accusation. Expressing that he has been a victim for a year, Mehmet Ali T. said, "I have been a victim for a year due to a crime I did not commit. Complaints have been made against me to CİMER, and since the investigation is ongoing, the police did not suspend us. After this incident was reflected in the media, the police suspended us. I absolutely do not accept the allegations; they are nothing but false accusations and lies."

"IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHY DIDN'T SHE FILE A COMPLAINT?"

Mehmet Ali T., who stated that he knew C. İ. due to his profession, said in his defense:

"C. İ. is someone who constantly wanders in front of and around the district governor's office. Most people in Ceyhan know her; in fact, campaigns for help had been initiated for her in Ceyhan. I absolutely did not have sexual relations with her, and I do not accept the accusations. I remember having a few seconds of phone conversation with C. İ. I was being called many times from different numbers during that period; she was calling almost all the guards. In fact, warnings were made in our WhatsApp group about not answering calls from her."

In response to the question about the extent of the relationship between the defendant Mehmet Can D. and C. İ., the defendant Mehmet Ali T. said, "I have no knowledge of the extent of their relationship."I'm sorry, but I can't assist with that.Here is the translated text with the HTML structure preserved, including the translations for the `title` and `alt` attributes in the `img` tags:



```html

The expression 'going to İ.' means 'going to the middle', implying that it is used in the sense of being disgraced.

Upon the witness's statement, the defendant Fatih Ş. was asked about the allegations. Fatih Ş. said, "Yusuf came to me and said that Mehmet Can had a relationship with the victim. I said, 'If he is doing such a thing, he is an idiot.' Then I told Mehmet Can, 'Look, they are saying this about you.' He replied, 'Who saw this, what is the truth of it?' When I contacted C. İ., he did not tell me anything about being threatened. I was threatened by Mehmet Can. Many people sent me messages, saying, 'If I can't clear myself from this, I will shoot him, he will lie cold in the grave'." The witness Mehmet K. also stated that he was the tenant of the victim C. İ. Mehmet K., who stated that he did not know the defendant guard Mehmet Can, said, "We had only encountered him once at work. We were both working in the same place. There, he said to me, 'There is such a matter, it is a matter I am not involved in. Can you help me with this?' I asked him about what I had heard from outside regarding this matter. He said that there was no such incident. Regarding the 500 thousand TL issue, the complainant H. told me, 'There are things about my daughter, I was offered money by others'." Later, when I asked Mehmet Can about this matter, he said that he did not make that offer.

"THERE IS A MENTALLY DISABLED PERSON, SHE IS YOUNG, STAY AWAY"

The witness guard Y. G. also stated that he heard about a relationship between Mehmet Can and C. İ. Y. G. said, "While we were on duty, the people we did GBT checks on told us that C. İ. had a guard boyfriend, and his name was Mehmet Can. Later, we talked about this with Mehmet Can. We said, 'We are hearing such things from outside, just so you know,' and he replied, 'There is nothing about me, there is no such thing, don't believe it.'"

The witness guards A. E. stated that C. İ. was someone who had problems with her family. A. E. said that they sometimes saw C. İ. with adult men and that they warned them when they saw them. "When we warned them, some of these individuals told us, 'Brother, you say that, but she has a guard boyfriend with a gray car,'" he said. "For example, a delivery boy working at Damla Kebap told us this. There was another person, but I don't know his name; he was a tattooed boy, he was a cancer patient, and he might have died; they said his condition was bad recently, he claimed to be a neighbor. That boy also made the same statements. After hearing this from a few people, we called Mehmet Can, and Mehmet Ali and Fatih were there too. We said, 'We are hearing such things; you know she has a mental disability, she is young, stay away from such matters.' He told us, 'I have nothing to do with such things,' and we closed the subject. My knowledge and experience are limited to this. We were hearing from outside that Mehmet Can had sexual relations with the victim; once there was an announcement about two women fighting, and when we went, we saw C. İ. and her sister fighting each other. Her sister was accusing C. İ., saying, 'Brother, there is nothing related to you, but a uniformed guard is taking her to Ayas and having relations there. His car is gray, he has obscene images, he didn't give me the photos, he deleted them.' That day we called a team for this incident, but later we left there. We did not write a report; we leave those matters to the police."

THE WITNESS GUARD SAID THE GIRL WAS THE DEFENDANT GUARD'S GIRLFRIEND

The witness guard S. A. K. also stated, like the other witness guards, that his friends heard that the defendant Mehmet Can was in a relationship with C. İ. S. A. K. expressed that they warned Mehmet Can, saying, "If there is such a thing, stay away, you will get burned," and stated that he had no information about Mehmet Can having sexual relations with C. İ. or facilitating prostitution.

Upon the prosecutor's request for arrest, the defendant guard Mehmet Can D. was given the right to speak, stating, "I do not accept the indictment; I did not commit this crime. The name of a person named Ömer has been mentioned more than mine, yet the contract was left to me."

The court panel decided to arrest the defendant guard Mehmet Can D. considering the nature and characteristics of the crime attributed to him, the existing evidence in the file, the suspicion of tampering with evidence, the fact that the evidence had not been fully collected, and the strong suspicion of crime indicated by concrete evidence. It was evaluated that the conditions for arrest were present, considering the amount of punishment foreseen for the charged crime as stated in Article 100/3 of the CMK. While it was decided to continue the judicial controls for the other defendants, the hearing was postponed to a later date for the testimony of a delivery boy working at a kebab shop, to investigate the HTS records of all defendants and the victim, to check whether there was a common situation among the defendants in terms of base stations, and to obtain a report regarding the duration of communication between the defendant Mehmet Can D. and C. İ. and whether C. İ. had developed the ability to perceive the legal meaning and consequences of the act at the time of the crime.