Should a woman die for justice to be served?

Should a woman die for justice to be served?

It was the year 2011. Ayşe was a 20-year-old woman living in the Marmara city of Bursa. She was slightly handicapped. As a woman of 20 years old, she had poor judgement; she could be tricked into doing things for candy. 

Ayşe met Cem on Facebook. Cem built trust in Ayşe. They met in a park; Cem took Ayşe to his home.  

At home he made Ayşe drink some beer, then advanced on her, took her clothes off and raped her. While Ayşe was trying to save herself from the man, the violence ascended as she resisted. The nail in her toe was torn; she had bruises on her back and chest. 

Then Cem texted his friend Kadir and he soon arrived; this time he raped Ayşe. Half-conscious Ayşe was then carried to Kadir’s truck and they stopped at the McDonald’s on Mudanya road. They bought hamburgers there and ate them inside the vehicle. This was recorded by city surveillance cameras. Later they pulled the vehicle into a remote spot on Mudanya road and they again raped Ayşe inside the vehicle, taking turns. They told her not to mention this incident to anybody otherwise they would kill her. They also told her they had already killed a small girl in İnegöl. 

While Ayşe’s mother reported to the police station that her daughter had not come home, Kadir dropped them at Cem’s house. Cem released Ayşe in the morning. Ayşe then walked to her grandmother’s home. 

Ayşe’s mother arrived and washed her with her aunt. Her mother said, “If her father hears about this, first he will kill Ayşe then he will kill us all; then he will go and kill the men. Let us close the matter.” However, the aunt argued that whoever did this to Ayşe should not get away with it. In the end, they took Ayşe to the police station. 

Because of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK), lawyer Murat Emre Kızılgedik was assigned to represent Ayşe. 

During that period before the file was sent from the Office of the Chief Prosecutor of Bursa to the Bursa Criminal Court, they noticed Ayşe was pregnant. She had an abortion with the permission of the court. In the DNA tests, it was proven that the father of the baby was one of the rapists. 

The defendants used the classic defense in these cases, saying that she had consented. Their aim was to get a reduction.  

The evidence was absolutely complete. The report from the forensic medicine department confirmed the horrific attack and that Ayşe’s psychological state was disrupted after the incident. The wounds and bruises on her body pointed out that she was raped and she had to defend herself. They were all there.

The defendants were expected to be sentenced to 15 to 20 years in the final hearing. 

The defense lawyer demanded extra time to make a defense against the prosecutor’s opinion. Some 10 days passed and even though there were no new documents, statements or evidence added to the file during that time, the opinion of the prosecutor changed and he wanted the release of the defendants.

And the court released the defendants. 

In the detailed ruling, there were sentences similar to, “There was consent. There was no clear evidence that the defendants are responsible for the battering marks…”

Well, who battered her and used force against her? Who was responsible for the rapes? 

The only difference between this case and the highly publicized Münevver Karabulut murder is that Ayşe survived. 

The lawyer appealed the case in 2013, but the file did not proceed any further. It is still at the Supreme Court of Appeals Prosecutor’s Office. 

After the lawyer explores all domestic legal paths, he will take the case to the European Court of Human Rights. 

Now, these two rapists are free to wander around in Bursa and who knows who else they are threatening. 

Down with your male justice!

Note: Because the victim’s father does not know about the incident, the names have been changed.