Investigation Against 4 Police Officers in Emine Bulut Feminicide Case

Click to read the article in Turkish

It has been five months since Emine Bulut was murdered by her ex-husband Fedai Varan in Kırıkkale on August 18, 2019. Charged with "wilful murder", Varan has been sentenced to life imprisonment in his final hearing at the Kırıkkale 1st Heavy Penal Court on October 21, 2019.

CLICK - Bulut Asked For Help from Police Before Being Murdered

As reported by Sibel Yükler from Gazete Karınca news website, a criminal complaint was filed against four police officers who had their signatures under the police report prepared at the Cumhuriyet Police Department, where Emine Bulut took refuge before being murdered.

Was the police report signed after the murder?

In the complaint submitted to the Kırıkkale Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, it was indicated that Emine Bulut was killed after leaving the police department and the measures foreseen by the Law no. 6284 on the Protection of Family and Prevention of Violence Against Women were not taken.

It was also stated the Bulut stayed in the police department for 29 minutes, but the police report was prepared 10 minutes after she left.

Drawing attention to the suspicion that the report, which did not have the signature of Bulut, might have been prepared after the murder, the complaint also contained the "CD watching analysis" of camera records dated August 22 and also included in the case file.

Deposition taken at the police department, not prosecutor's office

After the criminal complaint was filed, an investigation was launched against four police officers, including one police commander. The officers were charged with "misconduct in office".

In the ensuing investigation, a deputy police chief who was not at the police department on the day of incident also deposed as a witness.

Conducting the investigation against the officers, the Kırıkkale Chief Public Prosecutor's Office sent an official instruction to the Public Security Branch of Kırıkkale Directorate of Security, demanding that the depositions of police officers be taken. The Office also requested an inquiry into whether the necessary measures as per the Law no. 6284 were taken or not.

Deposition of police officer

The deposition of police officer Ş., who was working as the group commander on the day of incident, was taken on October 30 upon the instruction of the Chief Public Prosecutor Office.

In his deposition, Ş. said that "he had not seen any risks under the Law no. 6284" and "he did not issue a restraining order" for that reason.

Indicating that "he did not inform the Public Prosecutor about the issue as she did not have such application", police officer Ş. said that "he performed his duty duly" and rejected the charges brought against him. Police commander Ş. alleged that Emine Bulut did not request a protection order.

Officer's deposition conflicted with police report

When the deposition of police commander Ş. was compared with the police report, it was seen that there were some contradictions between the two.

In his deposition, the police officer said that Emine Bulut came to the police department because she was receiving insulting messages from Fedai Varan. According to his deposition, the officer asked Emine Bulut whether Fedai Varan was following him or not, to which Emine Bulut allegedly answered that "she was being followed by him from time to time, but she did not see him at the time and wanted to leave".

She was being followed, according to police report

This is actually where the contradictions between the officer's deposition and police report start. According to the report, Bulut said that "she had a row with her ex-husband in bazaar, she was being followed and receiving messages with swearwords" and these messages were seen.

"She was reminded that if she had a complaint, we had to receive her application", the report indicated. According to the report, Bulut "looked outside the window, said that her ex-husband, who was following her, left and she wanted to go too, but would come again to file a complaint."

Responsibility of neglect placed on Bulut

Hearing the statements of police officers, the Kırıkkale Directorate of Security sent an official report to the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office and claimed that "Emine Bulut did not want to benefit from the Law no. 6284."

In the report sent by the Security Directorate, the messages shown to the police by Bulut "did not contain threats, but insults".

Police officers reinstated

Indicating that the follow-up of insult offenses depends on whether there is a criminal complaint or not, the report alleged that "Bulut did not file any complaint" and no actions were taken for that reason.

Other police officers stated that "they did not meet Bulut and signed the police report upon the instruction of the group commander". Deposing as a witness, deputy police chief reported said that "he was taking a rest at that date, learnt the incident one day later and never saw Bulut".

Suspended from duty for a short time, they have returned to their duty after the inquiry. The investigation is still ongoing.

(EMK/SD)