Since material truth is sought in criminal proceedings, everything is considered evidence. This is a consequence of the principle of freedom of evidence. However, in criminal proceedings, methods that are unrestricted, contrary to the rules of law, and disregard the rights of the defendant cannot be employed to obtain material truth. The goal of criminal proceedings is to obtain the material truth regarding a concrete event and to ensure that it is proven beyond doubt with evidence. During the prosecution phase, evidence is the means of proof necessary to prove the concrete event and to reach the judge’s conclusion.
Evidence used for proof in criminal proceedings must represent the event. Evidence representing the event must be reasonable, consistent with material truth, and lawful.
UNLAWFUL EVIDENCE
To obtain material truth and prevent disregard for legal rules, evidence must be lawful and collected through lawful methods. In this context, evidence obtained unlawfully cannot be used as the basis for a verdict and cannot and should not influence the judge’s moral judgment. Prohibitions on obtaining evidence illegally are referred to as “prohibitions on evidence.” However, evidence obtained through illegal means is also affected by this violation, and therefore cannot be exempt from being illegal.
According to Article 148/3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, evidence obtained through prohibited methods cannot be considered evidence, even if consent is given. Furthermore, the statements of individuals whose statements are taken and confessions obtained during illegal arrests, detentions, and forced transfers must also be considered illegal evidence and must not be used in court proceedings.
TYPES OF EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES
Evidence is divided into categories. While there are various classifications, evidence that proves the main event the court must resolve is called direct evidence, while evidence that explains incidents related to the main event on which a decision must be made is called indirect or circumstantial evidence. Furthermore, evidence whose source is a person, such as a witness, defendant, or expert, and whose source is an object, document, or indication, can be classified as indirect evidence.
Our law has adopted the conscientious evidence system. This system grants the judge the right and duty to investigate ex officio. The judge is not obligated to rely on the evidence presented by the prosecution and defense. The court may conduct an ex officio investigation of evidence.
It should be noted that not every issue raised in a case needs to be proven. The judge will decide which defenses will be investigated and which will not, upon request or ex officio, depending on the type of crime. Therefore, the question of which issues must be proven is a relative one.
DEFENDANT STATEMENTS
The defendant is obligated to answer all questions regarding his or her identity truthfully; otherwise, he or she will be punished according to Article 40 of the Law on Violations. However, he or she is not held responsible for any inaccuracies in his or her answers to the questions asked. The defendant is the person who knows the incident best. However, it is considered natural for him or her to avoid telling the truth in his or her statements if he or she believes he or she will be punished after making such statements. This is because human nature is to avoid pain. The legal system has not ignored this fact.
However, while our legal system historically prioritized the defendant’s confession, today, due to the increased emphasis placed on uncovering the material truth, this issue is being approached with caution.
WITNESS STATEMENTS
Anyone in a third-party capacity can be a witness. Anyone capable of understanding, reasoning, and conveying their impressions/information regarding the incident in question can be a witness. Even if the witness is mentally ill, a child, a relative, or a close relative, or has previously been convicted of perjury, this does not preclude testimony. It is one of the least reliable forms of evidence.
Before the witness is heard, they are informed of the importance of telling the truth; that failure to tell the truth will result in a penalty for perjury; that they will be sworn to do so; and that they cannot leave the courtroom without permission.
The witness is required to make a statement regarding their identity; this obligation remains even if they have the right to refrain from testifying.
If the evidence in a trial consists of witnesses, they must be heard during the hearing.
Various measures can be taken under the Turkish Penal Code to protect witnesses. These measures may include concealing or altering the identity, or allowing the individual to avoid testifying. If a witness poses a grave danger, the witness’s voice or image may be altered to allow the witness to be heard.
Statements of Persons Other than the Defendant and the Witness
Under the heading of witnesses not sworn, our law allows accomplices to be heard as witnesses.
WRITTEN STATEMENTS
Any written statement, or statements made through it, that express an opinion that supports the case constitutes “written statement/document” evidence. These documents can be official documents such as police, prosecutor, or judge reports, or private writings such as letters and similar.
STATEMENTS BY IMAGE AND SOUND RECORDING DEVICES
These recordings serve as documentary evidence and indirectly represent the event. While tapes recording the moment of the event can provide direct representation, even indirect representations can constitute valuable evidence.
When examining the legality of such evidence, consideration must be given to various factors, such as whether the recording is confidential, whether it was obtained by public officials, whether the location is a public space, and whether the recorded activity is public.
Both universal legal principles and the Constitution provide absolute protection for an individual’s private life and right to communication. These rights may be suspended by a judge’s decision in the following cases:
*If there is a strong suspicion of a crime,
*To restore social peace and tranquility disrupted by the crime,
*If there is no other means of obtaining evidence.
While it is established that no evidence obtained lawfully, regardless of its origin, can be used as the basis for a verdict, audio/visual recordings, even if properly recorded and preserved, doctrine holds that they alone do not constitute sufficient evidence for a conviction. They must be supported by collateral evidence. However, they can serve as an indicator.
INDICATIONS
Any evidence that, when supported by other evidence, can lead to the conviction or acquittal of the defendant is considered an indicator. Examples include items found at the crime scene, brake marks, and data obtained from a physical examination of the person. Indications are crucial in establishing a causal link with collateral evidence, and in uncovering the material truth.
Indications directly support the evidence and enable a sound conclusion to be reached in resolving the issue of proof. For example, in sexual crimes, the presence of a biological sample belonging to the suspect on the victim constitutes significant evidence that the suspect had physical contact with the victim.
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
Electronic evidence is considered when data, records, and documents created, modified, transmitted, or stored electronically are used, or are intended to be used, to prove an alleged incident.
Electronic evidence can vary depending on the medium in which it is located, how it is obtained, and its power to substantiate the concrete event. Therefore, it is sometimes considered documentary evidence and sometimes symptomatic evidence. Because this evidence is more susceptible to external interference than other evidence, it must be carefully investigated and supported by other evidence.
After the proof is complete, the judge reaches a conclusion as to whether the alleged crime was committed by the defendant. A conviction is the determination, beyond any reasonable doubt, that a crime has been committed in the judge’s conscience and mind, based on the evaluation of available legal evidence. In this context, for a defendant to be sentenced, the defendant’s actions must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. This is because, particularly in serious criminal cases, the execution of sentences can result in prison sentence that severely restrict freedom.