- The first hearing in the case over the killing of journalist and video activist Hakan Tosun was held in Istanbul’s Bakırköy district. Before the hearing, police intervened against journalists, lawyers and politicians.
- The detained defendants admitted hitting Hakan Tosun but argued they had no “intent to kill.” Lawyers for the family pointed to security camera footage and forensic medicine reports.
- Hakan Tosun’s mother, Fatma Tosun, said: “I am complaining until the very end.” One witness told the court: “May the state protect my child.”
- The court ruled to continue the detention of the defendants. The trial was adjourned until 2 p.m. on July 8.
Rabia Çetin
The first hearing in the trial of detained defendants Abdurrahman Murat, 19, and Adnan Şahin, 25, who are being tried on charges of “intentional killing” over the death of journalist and video activist Hakan Tosun, who was killed on the night of Oct. 10 in Istanbul’s Esenyurt district, began today at Bakırköy 17th High Criminal Court. The hearing, during which police intervened against journalists, observers, lawyers and lawmakers at the courtroom entrance beforehand, lasted 5 1/2 hours.
Before the hearing, Hakan Tosun’s family, friends, lawmakers, politicians, lawyers and activists gathered in front of the Bakırköy metrobus station and held a press statement. After a brief police blockade, the crowd marched from the station to the Bakırköy Courthouse.
Police intervention against lawyers, journalists and politicians in courthouse corridor
The hearing was followed by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) Turkey Representative Erol Önderoğlu, Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) Turkey Representative Özgür Öğret, Turkish Journalists’ Union (TGS) Secretary General Sibel Güneş, CHP lawmaker Evrim Rızvanoğlu, EMEP lawmaker İskender Bayhan, TİP Chair Erkan Baş, DEM Party Istanbul Provincial Chair Çınar Altan, Istanbul Bar Association Chair İbrahim Kaboğlu, Deputy Chair Leyla Süren, and representatives from the Antalya Bar Association and the Union of Turkish Bar Associations. Before the hearing, the court imposed restrictions on the press, citing the small size of the courtroom.
The presiding judge said only three lawyers, one lawmaker, one bar association representative and four journalists would be allowed into the courtroom. Photography in the corridor was also banned. A brief argument followed. Police dragged journalists standing in front of the courtroom door with riot shields. Some people were assaulted. Through negotiations by lawyers, seven journalists were eventually allowed into the courtroom. Another brief argument followed that decision. Police pushed journalists away with shields and some were assaulted.
Hearing followed via SEGBİS
The hearing at Bakırköy 17th High Criminal Court, which was scheduled to begin at 2 p.m., only started at 2:45 p.m. Lawyers’ request for an additional courtroom was accepted. Journalists, observer lawyers, lawmakers and press organizations who were not allowed inside followed the hearing from Bakırköy 19th High Criminal Court via SEGBİS, Turkey’s audio-visual court system.
The defendants also joined the hearing via SEGBİS from Sakarya No. 1 L-Type Prison, where they are being held.
Defendants’ defense statements: “He swore at us”
After identity checks, defendant Abdurrahman Murat gave his defense statement first. Murat said:
“I am very sorry this happened. May God rest the deceased’s soul and my condolences to his family. When I left the house at night, I saw Hakan sitting by a pole. His clothes were torn, his eye was bruised and swollen. I walked past him and went home. When I went out again to go to the market, I saw Hakan still sitting there. There were alcohol bottles and something resembling drugs next to him. I told him not to drink there and said there was an empty lot at the entrance of the neighborhood where he could go instead. He swore at me, so I intervened. But I did not hit his head. Ayhan brother came to the scene and took me away. He said the person was drunk and told me not to get involved. Then Adnan brother came. He took me in the car and told me to go home and not go outside. We drove around in the car. Later, when I returned and passed by him again, he swore at me again, so I kicked him. Adnan Şahin also kicked him but did not hit his face. I did not call an ambulance or the police. While leaving the scene, I asked a couple there to call an ambulance. They called. I wish my hand had broken rather than me throwing that punch. The victim provoked me and swore repeatedly.”
The prosecutor asked Murat how he encountered motorcycle rider Yusuf Özaktan and why he returned to the scene.
Judge to defense lawyer: “You are trying to make him say what’s in your mind”
Öznur Tosun’s lawyer Hakan Bozyurt asked Murat: “In the camera footage, you leave the house and go directly to Hakan Tosun. Hakan did not attack you, correct? I did not have a weapon in my hand, correct? You hit Hakan Tosun, correct? You did not leave the scene on Yusuf Ö.’s motorcycle, correct?”
Murat replied: “Yes, I hit him, that’s true. I hit him twice, my kicks were not to his face. Yes, that’s correct, I did not leave on Yusuf’s motorcycle. I left by car.”
Murat’s lawyer repeatedly asked him whether Hakan Tosun hit his head while falling or fell on his backpack. The presiding judge told the lawyer: “You are trying to make him say what’s in your mind.”
Defendant: “I only nudged him, I didn’t hit him”
Defendant Adnan Şahin then gave his defense statement.
“On the day of the incident, I went to see my father and spent some time there before leaving. While sitting in my car, I heard shouting from my left side. I saw Abdurrahman and asked, ‘What’s happening here?’ I told Hakan Tosun to leave, and he swore at me. While I was taking Abdurrahman away by car, his friend on a motorcycle came after us, and Abdurrahman said, ‘Brother, I’ll go by motorcycle.’ When we returned to the person, I intervened to check on him. I definitely did not act with the intent to hit him. I wanted to see if he was moving. His clothes were messy. Abdurrahman told me, ‘This guy is disturbing the neighborhood.’ The person swore at me. I acted to nudge him, I had no intent to hit him.”
Tension between defense lawyers and the Tosun family’s lawyers
The prosecutor asked Şahin whether he kicked Hakan Tosun or hit him with another object and whether he had seen Tosun in the neighborhood before.
Şahin replied: “I had not seen him before, I don’t know him. I did not kick him, I touched his thigh to nudge him.”
Hakan Tosun’s lawyer Hakan Bozyurt asked Şahin: “You said you did not hit Hakan while he was sitting right next to you. But there is camera footage. Is the footage lying?”
Şahin replied: “I did not attack him there.”
Defense lawyers interjected, saying: “It is not clear from the footage who hit him. You are accusing my client.”
Lawyer Cemal Yücel, representing the Tosun family, said: “We will ask our questions and determine who did what.”
Yücel asked Şahin: “You get out of your vehicle and go to the scene during the attack, and you kick him. It’s on camera.”
Şahin replied: “No, I did not kick him.”
Yücel responded: “No, the footage shows you kicking him. After the first attack, the three of you were leaving the scene. Why did Abdurrahman get into your car afterward?”
Şahin said: “I was trying to remove Abdurrahman from the scene.”
Yücel continued: “But you returned with the car. The man on the motorcycle, Yusuf, comes to you. You were coming back to carry out the second attack behind the motorcycle.”
Defense lawyers objected: “You are saying they came to attack.”
The Tosun family’s lawyer replied: “Because they did attack. They carried out the second attack.”
Hakan Tosun’s mother: “I am complaining until the very end”
After the defense statements, Hakan Tosun’s sisters, brother and mother requested to intervene in the case as complainants.
Fatma Tosun said:
“That evening he told me, ‘Mom, I’m coming home.’ I called him around 9 p.m. and he said he was on the way. That was our last conversation. My child would never swear. At most he might have said ‘brother.’ My child would not hurt an ant. If he had 100 lira, he would share it with animals. They turned my child into a drunk and a drug user. Did my child smash his own head against the wall? I am complaining until the very end. May they suffer what I have suffered.”
Lawyer Cemal Yücel said the defendants’ actions were confirmed by camera footage and forensic reports and requested they be punished for “intentional killing.”
The Istanbul and Antalya bar associations also requested to join the case, saying: “The right to life, press freedom, environmental rights and people’s right to move freely outside have been violated. We request to join the proceedings for the rule of law.”
Tosun family lawyer: “If they hit lightly, how did Hakan’s skull fractures occur?”
Later, lawyer Cemal Yücel said:
“Hakan Tosun was a journalist, documentary filmmaker and environmental activist. He was a friend of nature, trees and animals. As the defendants claimed, there was absolutely no harassment by Hakan toward anyone, nor did he swear at the defendants. The camera footage contains no insults by Hakan toward the defendants. As seen on camera, while Hakan was sitting there for a long time, defendant Abdurrahman came from behind and hit him four times. The other defendant, Adnan, also approached and kicked Hakan. Then Abdurrahman and Adnan left in a car, returned again while Hakan was barely able to walk on the road, and first Abdurrahman punched him and then Adnan hit him. The defendants said they hit lightly, did not hit hard and merely nudged him. There is a forensic report in the file. Hakan suffered fractures to his facial bones, neck and skull. The autopsy and forensic reports show the attacks were carried out with intent to kill. If they hit lightly, how did these skull fractures occur?”
“The defendants should be punished separately for intentional killing”
Yücel continued:
“We request these defendants be punished for intentional killing. Do not rely on biased testimony from family members or neighbors. The incident is clearly captured on two cameras. Contrary to the defendants’ claims, there were no torn clothes and no women or children nearby. The cameras show this. Hundreds of people pass by where Hakan was sitting. If there had been anything abnormal, wouldn’t passersby have intervened? The metrobus incident occurred one hour before this attack. It has no connection to this incident. The evidence is clear, there was a severe attack. Do not allow these defendants to benefit from a sentence reduction for unjust provocation. We request both defendants be punished separately for intentional killing.”
Witness who saw defendants hit Tosun tells judge: “May the state protect my child”
The court then began hearing 13 witnesses.
Witness Gönül, who witnessed the attack, said:
“The incident happened in front of my door. I live on the third floor. I saw someone lying on the ground and called an ambulance. The ambulance arrived late. The person lying there was uncovered. Someone passing by even covered him up. I saw him urinate while lying there. I did not hear insults or swearing. I saw Abdurrahman at the scene. There was a black car there. I saw someone get out of the black car, and Abdurrahman hit the person on the ground. I saw Abdurrahman get off the motorcycle. I called the ambulance, but it arrived very late. When they hit him, the person on the ground was lying there motionless.”
Witness Gönül remained silent when asked whether Abdurrahman and Adnan hit Hakan. The judge said: “You took an oath. Lying is a crime.”
Gönül replied: “May our state protect me. I do not want anything to happen to my child because of what I am saying. I am raising my child alone. I want the state to protect my child.”
Motorcycle rider witness also heard
Yusuf Özakdağ, who was at the scene on a motorcycle the night Hakan Tosun was killed and against whom lawyers filed a criminal complaint, also testified.
Özakdağ said:
“I do not know Adnan Şahin, I only know Abdurrahman. Hakan was sitting by an electricity pole. He had beer in his hand. Abdurrahman told him to get up and leave but did not hit him. Then Adnan came and asked, ‘What happened?’ We said, ‘Nothing happened.’ Adnan left. Abdurrahman and I got on the motorcycle and went to the market. On the way back, Hakan swore at Abdurrahman again, so Abdurrahman slapped him once. Someone arrived in a black BMW — it was Adnan Şahin — and he also hit Hakan. I only saw Abdurrahman hit him once and Adnan hit him once.”
After the witnesses testified, the Tosun family’s lawyers said they would later make a detailed statement regarding the testimony. Defense lawyers and the defendants said they did not accept statements made against them. Defendant Adnan Şahin said: “They are trying to save Abdurrahman.”
Prosecutor requests phone records and continuation of detention
The prosecutor then requested that the Tosun family be formally accepted as parties to the case. The prosecutor also requested that three people mentioned in the indictment as having knowledge about an incident on the metrobus not be heard as witnesses.
The prosecutor requested that witness Ayhan Adıgüzel be forcibly brought to court regarding the assault and that expert analysis be conducted on the video footage in the case file. The prosecutor also requested that the Büyükçekmece Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office be asked whether any investigation is being conducted against witness Yusuf Özakdağ.
Finally, the prosecutor requested the continuation of the defendants’ detention.
Twelve-minute footage from the night of the killing shown in court
During the hearing, lawyer Hakan Bozyurt showed 12 minutes of security camera footage from the night of the killing and described how motorcycle rider Yusuf Özakdağ became involved in the incident. Bozyurt said the level of violence was not as mild as the defendants claimed.
Lawyer Cemal Yücel also said the footage showed, contrary to the defendants’ statements, that Hakan Tosun’s clothes were still on him. Yücel requested an expert examination of the footage submitted to the case file.
Defense lawyer: “My client did not assault Hakan Tosun, he nudged him”
Adnan Şahin’s lawyer later said:
“My client did not deliver a fatal blow. He touched him with the intent to nudge and check him. He did not strike the deceased with any fatal blow.”
Abdurrahman Murat’s lawyer said:
“This incident is not related to Hakan Tosun’s journalism. It happened because of Hakan Tosun’s conduct and behavior.”
Trial adjourned until July
After a recess, the judge ruled to continue the detention of the defendants, request phone traffic records between the defendants, and drop plans to hear the metrobus witnesses. The hearing was adjourned until 2 p.m. on July 8.
