27.01.2026 22:35
In the Kartepe district of Kocaeli, a person shot and killed a courier whom he claimed was bothering his wife. The defendant, whose trial is ongoing, denied the allegations during the final hearing of the case, stating that she had no relationship with the victim and rejecting claims that she opened the door in inappropriate clothing and wrote emotional and disturbing notes on money and tips.
On March 29, 2025, a dispute broke out between Hikmet Ş., Hasan Hüseyin Osmanoğlu, and his brother Halil İbrahim Osmanoğlu in the Derbent neighborhood of Kartepe district in Kocaeli. As the argument escalated into a fight, Hikmet Ş. fired three shots with a gun he pulled from his waist. Hasan Hüseyin Osmanoğlu, who was hit by the bullets, was seriously injured in the chest. Hikmet Ş. fled the scene. Hasan Hüseyin Osmanoğlu, who was taken to the hospital, lost his life.
ONE OF THE 3 SUSPECTS CAPTURED WAS ARRESTED Police teams initiated an investigation into the incident and captured Hikmet Ş. along with A.A. and E.Ç. The three suspects were referred to the courthouse after their procedures were completed at the Homicide Bureau of the Public Security Department. While A.A. and E.Ç. were released under judicial control by the court, Hikmet Ş. was arrested and sent to prison.
ALLEGATION OF "EMOTIONAL AND DISTURBING NOTES ON MONEY AND TIPS" According to allegations reflected in the case file, it was claimed that the defendant's wife wrote emotional and disturbing notes on the money while paying the victim Hasan Hüseyin Osmanoğlu, who delivered the order. It was stated that the victim was disturbed by this situation and did not respond, while it was alleged that the defendant followed Osmanoğlu after learning about the situation and warned him to leave the area. The detained defendant claimed in his defense that the victim had disturbed his wife by calling her, and that he was cornered by the victim and his brother on the day of the incident, asserting that the gun he pulled out fired during the struggle that ensued.
"HE WAS CONSTANTLY MESSAGING ME BUT I DID NOT RESPOND" The hearing regarding the incident continued at the Kocaeli 4th High Criminal Court. Hikmet Ş., who was being tried under arrest for "premeditated murder under provocation," attended the hearing along with the lawyers of the parties and witnesses. The defendant's wife, Fatma Ş., was heard as a witness during the hearing. Fatma Ş. claimed that she met the victim through a request and message he sent her on social media, stating, "The victim was constantly messaging me, but I did not respond. When he last sent me my phone number as a message, I asked him where he found my number, and he said, 'It's a trade secret.' The children got the number when they ordered food at home. I did not respond to the victim except for this message. The victim continued to call me constantly. We did not have a relationship. I was disturbed by his calls. My husband suspected something was wrong, but I did not tell him. He found the victim's number in the blocked contacts," she said.
"I DO NOT KNOW HOW TO READ AND WRITE PROPERLY" Fatma Ş., who said that she could not get along with her husband Hikmet Ş., stated, "The reason for our disagreement was not the victim. I do not accept the claim that I greeted the victim, who delivered the food, at the door in inappropriate clothing. I also do not accept that I wrote notes on the money. I do not know how to read and write properly. Normally, I write messages using a voice dictation application. I do not fully understand the incoming messages. For this reason, I do not accept the claim that I wrote a message to the victim. My husband was anxious lately, saying he was being followed. In fact, he even changed his license plate for this reason. After these events, I went to a shelter and returned home after a while. It is true that my husband assaulted me, saying, 'How could you betray me?' On the day of the incident, Hikmet called me and said, 'The man was accidentally shot because of you,'" she said. After the defendant stated that he had nothing to say and the lawyers requested time, the court panel decided to continue the detention and adjourned the hearing.
THE DEFENDANT'S DEFENSE AT THE FIRST HEARING In his defense at the first hearing, the defendant Hikmet Ş. stated that he noticed his wife was in constant contact with an unknown phone number for a long time, and when he asked whose number it was, his wife said she went to a women's shelter. The defendant claimed that he later learned that this number belonged to the victim Hasan Hüseyin Osmanoğlu and that he discussed this situation with Osmanoğlu when he encountered him on the day of the incident, admitting that the victim called his wife and that the incident occurred during the argument that ensued.